W  *  -.  •  ' 

t'l1  •  I 


.!{*.•:.;• 


:•>         '  - 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
AT   LOS  ANGELES 


INTRODUCTION   TO   THE   ENGLISH 
HISTORIANS 


8515     12 


AN  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE 
ENGLISH  HISTORIANS 


BY 


CHARLES   A.    BEARD,    PH.D. 

LECTURER    IN    HISTORY    AND     POLITICAL    SCIENCE 
COLUMBIA   UNIVERSITY 


4  5  2  7 


Pork 

THE   MACMILLAN    COMPANY 
1911 

All  rights  reserved 


COPYRIGHT,  1906, 
BY  THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY. 


Set  up  and  electrotyped.     Published  October,  1906.     Reprinted 
February,  1908;  October,  1911. 


NortoooB 

J.  8.  Gushing  Co.  —  Berwick  A  Smith  Co. 
Norwood,  MMM.,  U.S.A. 


College 
Library 

Df\ 

3Z 


PREFATORY   NOTE 

A  COLLEGE  course  in  English  history  must  introduce  the 
student  to  a  number  of  great  authorities  on  special  periods  and 
topics.  It  is  not  enough  that  these  authorities  should  be  casually 
read ;  they  should  be  studied  as  carefully  as  a  case-book  in  law, 
and  then  critically  considered  in  the  classroom.  It  is  also 
necessary  that  all  the  students  should  do  this  special  reading  at 
^  the  time  when  the  particular  topic  is  reached  in  the  text-book 
or  lectures. 

The   teacher   is   therefore   confronted   with  the   problem  of 

controlling   this   additional   reading,  and    of    satisfying    himself 

that  it  is  well  done  by  all  the  students.     If  he  has  large  classes, 

he  constantly  meets  the  complaint  that  the  students  have  not 

^  been  able  to  secure  the  required  book  at  the  proper  time,  and 

->  concerted  class  work  is  thereby  destroyed.     If  he  seeks  to  avoid 

«    this  difficulty  by  requiring  the  students  to  hand  in  notes,  he  not 

£   only  makes  class  discussion  impossible,  but  he  doubtless  dis- 

^    covers  that  a  great  deal  of  the  note-taking  is  perfunctory,  and 

that  some  have  copied  from  the  more  industrious. 

Finding  my  own  experience  confirmed  by  that  of  many  other 
teachers  of  English  history,  I  venture  to  issue  this  volume  of 
readings  as  an  attempt  at  a  partial  solution  of  the  problem 
stated  above.  I  am  conscious  of  the  difficulties  accompanying 
such  an  enterprise,  and  realize  fully  the  great  and  legitimate 
divergence  of  opinion  that  teachers  will  have  in  selecting  assign- 
ments for  their  students.  It  seems,  however,  that  all  the  topics 
included  in  this  collection  are  of  first-rate  importance,  and  that 
the  authorities  represented  are  those  worthy  of  careful  study. 
That  there  are  hundreds  of  equally  important  selections  and 
other  writers  on  English  history  of  quite  as  high  rank,  there  can 


vi  Preface 

be  no  doubt ;  but  every  undertaking  has  its  limitations.  More- 
over, the  problem  of  proportion  is  a  difficult  one ;  but  I  believe 
many  excellent  arguments  might  be  advanced  for  devoting  one 
half  the  book  to  the  last  three  centuries  of  English  history. 

Such  a  collection  as  this  does  not  obviate  the  necessity  of 
recourse  to  the  authorities  themselves ;  it  only  enables  the 
teacher  to  compel  a  thorough  study  of  minimum  requirements. 
Indeed,  the  extracts  given  here  should  stimulate  an  interest 
in  the  great  historians  and  lead  the  student  further  afield. 
All  the  books  quoted  below  should  be  in  the  library  of  every 
college. 

In  addition  to  introducing  the  student  to  many  English  histo- 
rians, these  readings  may  serve  as  the  basis  for  critical  opera- 
tions of  great  disciplinary  value.  By  having  the  students  turn 
to  the  original  volumes  from  which  these  extracts  are  taken  and 
specially  examine  the  foot-notes  and  citations  of  evidence,  an 
understanding  of  the  constructive  methods  of  the  various  authors 
may  be  developed.  This  analysis  of  secondary  authorities 
should  prove  as  useful  in  training  the  critical  faculties  as  an 
attempt  to  build  up  a  narrative  from  the  sources.  It  might 
prove  more  useful,  since  most  college  students  in  after  life  will 
do  far  more  reading  than  research.  The  art  of  scholarly  appre- 
ciation is  certainly  a  desirable  permanent  possession. 

To  further  facilitate  critical  operations,  short  bibliographies 
have  been  added,  especially  to  those  extracts  which  need  ampli- 
fication or  contain  controverted  views.  The  selections  are 
reproduced  exactly  as  they  stand  in  the  works  from  which  they 
are  taken  ;  no  attempt  has  been  made  to  modify  or  suppress  the 
opinions  of  the  respective  authors.  No  foot-notes  are  added, 
for  they  are  not  usually  read  by  the  college  student.  The  critical 
work  must  be  done  by  the  teacher  and  the  students  themselves 
if  it  is  to  be  of  any  real  value.  The  bibliographies  merely  indi- 
cate some  of  the  important  materials  to  which  they  may  turn 
for  divergent  views.  This  work  may  be  helpfully  supplemented 
by  constant  reference  to  the  source  books  by  Kendall,  Colby, 
Lee,  Stubbs,  Gee  and  Hardy,  Prothero,  Gardiner,  Robertson, 


Preface 


vn 


and  Adams  and  Stephens,  which  are  fortunately  known  to  most 
college  teachers  and  should  be  in  every  teaching  library. 

I  am  greatly  indebted  to  the  authors  and  publishers  who  have 
generously  allowed  me  to  make  these  selections,  and  due 
acknowledgment  is  made  with  each  extract.  I  am  also  under 
obligations  to  several  teachers  of  English  history,  whose  names 
I  will  not  associate  with  an  undertaking  so  experimental  in 
character. 

CHARLES  A.  BEARD. 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY, 
September.  1906. 


CONTENTS 

PART    I 

THE   FOUNDATIONS   OF   ENGLAND 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.    Two  THEORIES  OF  THE  ANGLO-SAXON  CONQUEST  i 

II.    OLD  BRITAIN  AND  THE  ANGLO-SAXON  CONQUEST       ...  6 

III.  ADOPTION  OF  CHRISTIANITY  AND  UNIFICATION  OF  ENGLAND     .  12 

IV.  ALFRED  THE  GREAT  AND  ENGLISH  LEARNING    ....  30 
V.    THE  REIGN  OF  CNUT 38 

VI.    THE  ANGLO-SAXON  ROYAL  COUNCIL 48 


PART   II 

FEUDALISM   AND   NATIONALISM 

I.    THE  MEN  OF  LONDON  AND  THE  CORONATION  OF  WILLIAM  THE 

CONQUEROR 61 

II.    ANGLO-NORMAN  FEUDALISM 73 

III.  SORTS  AND  CONDITIONS  OF  MEN 78 

IV.  REFORMS  IN  CHURCH  AND  STATE  UNDER  HENRY  II          .        .  96 
V.    THE  TRUE  NATURE  OF  MAGNA  CARTA no 

VI.    THE  ORIGIN  OF  PARLIAMENT 124 

VII.    GROWTH  OF  PARLIAMENTARY  POWERS 140 

PART   III 

MEDIEVAL   INSTITUTIONS 

I.    THE  GROWTH  OF  AN  ENGLISH  MANOR       .        .        .        .        .  158 

II.    THE  MEDIAEVAL  GILDS 169 

III.    TOWN  LIFE  IN  THE  MIDDLE  AGES 185 

ix 


x  Contents 

CHAPTER  fAC« 

IV.    THE  CHURCH  IN  THE  MIDDLE  AGES 204 

V.    JOHN  WYCUFFE  AND  THE  CHURCH 221 

PART   IV 

THE  TUDOR  AGE 

I.    THE  NEW  LEARNING — ERASMUS  AND  MORE    ....  231 
II.    STATE  OF  RELIGIOUS  OPINION  ON  THE  EVE  OF  THE  SEPARA- 
TION FROM  ROME 246 

III.    PARLIAMENT  AND  THE  BREACH  WITH  ROME     .        .        .        -255 
i     IV.    THE  MAINTENANCE  OF  THE  NEW  ESTABLISHMENT   . 

V.    THE  ORIGIN  OF  THE  DOCTRINAL  REVOLT         ....  274 

VI.    THE  LAST  DAYS  OF  THOMAS  CRANMER 281 

VII.    THE  ELIZABETHAN  SETTLEMENT  IN  THE  CHURCH     .        .        .  295 

VIII.    EUROPE  AND  ENGLAND  IN  THE  ELIZABETHAN  AGE  .        .        .  307 

IX.    THE  GROWTH  OF  PURITANISM 321 

PART   V 
THE  STUART  CONSTITUTIONAL  CONFLICT 

I.    OPENING  OF  THE  CONSTITUTIONAL  STRUGGLE  UNDER  JAMES  I  331 

II.    THE  PARLIAMENTARY  CRISIS  OF  1629 347 

III.  ARCHBISHOP  LAUD  AND  THE  RELIGIOUS  CONTROVERSY     .        .  355 

IV.  LONG  PARLIAMENT  AND  THE  PEACEFUL  REVOLUTION       .       .  364 
V.    CHARLES  I  AND  HIS  ACCUSERS 373 

VI.    CROMWELL  AND  PARLIAMENT 381 

VII.    THE  RESTORATION  SETTLEMENT  IN  STATE  AND  CHURCH  .       .  391 

VIII.    JAMES  II  AND  THE  CATHOLIC  REACTION 404 

IX.    THE  WHIG  REVOLUTION  AND  SETTLEMENT      .       .       .       .417 

PART  VI 

THE  EXPANSION  OF  ENGLAND 

I.    MOTIVES  FOR  COLONIZATION 423 

II.    DRAKE  AND  THE  CIRCUMNAVIGATION 434 

\ 


Contents  xi 


CHAPTER  PAGE 

III.  RISE  OF  BRITISH  DOMINION  IN  INDIA      .  443 

IV.  THE  CONTEST  FOR  CANADA 452 

PART  VII 
ENGLAND   UNDER  THE  GEORGES 

I.  WALPOLE  AND  HIS  SYSTEM 466 

II.  JOHN  WESLEY  AND  METHODISM 478 

III.  PERSONAL  GOVERNMENT  OF  GEORGE  III 492 

IV.  THE  INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION 505 

V.    THE  CONTINENTAL  SYSTEM 520 

PART  VIII 
THE  AGE  OF  REFORM 

I.    THE  OLD  PARLIAMENTARY  SYSTEM 538 

II.    THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 549 

III.  THE  TRIUMPH  OF  URBAN  DEMOCRACY        .                .        .        .  566 

IV.  THE  ENFRANCHISEMENT  OF  THE  RURAL  LABORER     .        .        .  582 

V.  THE  CABINET  SYSTEM 594 

VI.    LABOR  AND  SOCIALISM  IN  ENGLISH  POLITICS     ....  608 

PART   IX 

THE  EMPIRE   IN  THE  NINETEENTH   CENTURY 

I.    THE  ECONOMIC  FOUNDATIONS  OF  IMPERIALISM  ....  623 

II.    THE  GREAT  INDIAN  MUTINY 638 

III.    THE  AUSTRALIAN  CONSTITUTION 645 

INDEX 663 


PART   I 

THE   FOUNDATIONS   OF   ENGLAND 
CHAPTER  I 

TWO  THEORIES   OF  THE.  ANGLO-SAXON   CONQUEST 

THE  problem  of  the  racial  elements  composing  English  national- 
ity has  received  extended  consideration  at  the  hands  of  many 
eminent  historians  and  ethnologists.  Indeed,  all  older  writers 
devoted  excessive  attention  to  the  question  of  how  far  the  course 
of  English  history  has  been  affected  by  Celtic,  Roman,  and  Teu- 
tonic influences.  A  great  many  of  them  sharply  distinguished 
the  Teutons  from  the  Romans,  ascribing  to  the  former  a  peculiar 
genius  for  personal  liberty  and  self-government  as  contrasted 
with  the  latter.  The  adherents  to  this  theory  found  the  illustra- 
tions of  their  doctrines  in  the  history  of  England  and  ignored 
the  contradictions  to  be  found  everywhere  in  the  history  of 
Germany,  the  Teutonic  country  which  felt  the  direct  influence 
of  Rome  less  than  did  France  or  England.  According  to  this 
view,  the  history  of  England  begins  with  the  story  of  independent 
warriors  who  invaded  Britain,  swept  away  the  elements  of  Celtic 
and  Roman  culture,  and  founded  a  nation  of  freemen  governing 
themselves  through  local  and  national  popular  assemblies.  To 
be  sure,  England  afterward  suffered  from  feudalism  and  despotism, 
but  the  spirit  of  liberty  inherent  in'  the  people  finally  triumphed 
over  these  reactionary  forces. 

Now  this  entire  theory  has  been  given  an  importance  which  its 
intrinsic  worth  does  not  justify,  especially  in  view  of  the  present 
tendency  among  scientists  to  minimize  the  influence  of  race  as 
the  determining  factor  in  the  shaping  of  institutions.  Moreover 


1  English  Historians 

the  theory,  which  was  largely  the  outcome  of  reading  democratic 
ideas  of  the  nineteenth  century  into  very  scanty  and  fragmentary 
evidences,  has  been  attacked  during  the  last  two  decades  with 
great  energy  and  erudition.  On  the  other  hand,  there  has  appeared 
an  opposing  view  that  the  bulk  of  the  English  population  is  Celtic, 
and  that  Romano- Celtic  institutions  persisted  in  spite  of  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  conquest. 

This  controversy  has  not  led  to  any  very  definite  results,  and 
the  subjects  of  discussion  have  lost  whatever  moral  value  they 
were  once  supposed  to  have  had,  for  no  one  now  believes  that 
the  form  of  land  tenure  in  Anglo-Saxon  times,  for  example,  throws 
any  light  at  all  on  the  present  English  land  problem.  It  might 
as  well  be  admitted  that  we  can  never  know  the  numerical  pro- 
portion of  Celts  and  Teutons  in  the  English  nation,  for  there  are 
no  data  on  which  to  base  a  conclusion.  While  there  is  still  a 
tendency  to  hold  that  the  majority  were  Teutons,  there  is  also 
a  tendency  to  reject  the  theory  that  these  Teutons  had  any  par- 
ticular genius  for  political  liberty  or  any  peculiar  institutions 
which  marked  them  off  from  other  peoples  in  a  primitive  stage 
of  culture.  The  best  statement  of  the  problem  as  it  now  stands 
is  in  a  remarkable  study  of  early  English  institutions  by  Professor 
Maitland,  Domesday  Book  and  Beyond. 

§  i.  Statement  of  the  Two  Theories1 

We  are  told  that  "in  spite  of  all  the  labor  that  has  been  spent 
on  the  early  history  of  England,  scholars  are  still  at  variance  upon 
the  most  fundamental  of  questions:  the  question  whether  that 
history  began  with  a  population  of  independent  freemen  or  with 
a  population  of  dependent  serfs."  Some  exception  may  be  taken 
to  this  statement.  No  one  denies  that  for  the  purposes  of  Eng- 
lish history  slavery  is  a  primitive  institution,  nor  that  in  the 
seventh  and  eighth  centuries  there  were  many  slaves  in  England. 
On  the  other  hand,  no  one  will  assert  that  we  can  ascertain,  even 
approximately,  the  ratio  that  the  number  of  slaves  bore  to  the 
number  of  free  men.  Moreover,  such  terms  as  "  dependent "  and 

1  Maitland,  Domesday  Book  and  Beyond,  pp.  221  ff. 


Two  Theories  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Conquest       3 

"independent"  are  not  words  that  we  can  profitably  quarrel  over, 
since  they  are  inexact  and  ambiguous. 

For  all  this,  however,  it  may  well  be  said  that  there  are  two 
main  theories  before  the  world.  The  one  would  trace  the  Eng- 
lish manor^back  to  the  Roman  villa,  would  think  of  the  soil  of 
England'as  being  tilled  from  the  first  mainly  by  men  who,  when 
they  were  not  mere  slaves,  were  coloni  ascript  to  the  land.  The 
other  would  postulate  the  existence  of  a  large  number  of  free  men 
who  with  their  own  labor  tilled  their  own  soil,  of  men  who  might 
fairly  be  called  free  "peasant  proprietors,"  since  they  were  far  from 
rich  and  had  few  slaves  or  servants,  and  yet  who  were  no  mere 
peasants,  since  they  habitually  bore  arms  in  the  national  host. 
What  may  be  considered  for  the  moment  as  a  variant  on  this  lat- 
ter doctrine  would  place  the  ownership  of  the  soil,  or  of  large  tracts 
of  the  soil,  not  in  these  free  peasants  taken  as  individuals,  but  in 
free  village  communities. 

§  2.   Argument  for  the  Second  Theory 

Now  we  will  say  at  once  that  the  first  of  these  theories  we  can- 
not accept  if  it  be  put  forward  in  a  general  form,  if  it  be  applied 
to  the  whole  or  anything  like  the  whole  of  England.  Certainly 
we  are  not  in  a  position  to  deny  that  in  some  cases  a  Roman  villa 
having  come  into  the  hands  of  a  Saxon  chieftain,  he  treated  the  slaves 
and  coloni  that  he  found  upon  it  in  much  the  same  way  as  that 
in  which  they  had  been  theretofore  treated,  though  even  in  such 
a  case  the  change  was  in  all  probability  momentous,  since  large 
commerce  and  all  that  large  commerce  implies  had  perished. 
But  against  the  hypothesis  that  this  was  the  general  case,  the  Eng- 
lish language  and  the  names  of  our  English  villages  are  the  un- 
answered protest.  It  seems  incredible  that  the  bulk  of  the  popu- 
lation should  have  been  of  Cejtic  blood  and  yet  that  the  Celtic 
language  should  not  merely  have  disappeared,  but  have  stamped 
few  traces  of  itself  upon  the  speech  of  the  conquerors. 

This  we  regard  as  an  objection  which  goes  to  the  root  of  the 
whole  matter  and  which  throws  upon  those  who  would  make  the 
English  nation  in  the  main  a  nation  of  Celtic  bondmen,  the  burden 
of  strictly  proving  their  thesis.  The  German  invaders  must  have 
been  numerous.  The  Britons  were  no  cowards.  They  contested 
the  soil  inch  by  inch.  The  struggle  was  long  and  arduous.  What 
then,  we  must  ask,  became  of  the  mass  of  the  victors  ?  Surely  it 
is  impossible  that  they  at  once  settled  down  as  the  "dependent 
serfs"  of  their  chieftains. 


4  English  Historians 

Again,  though  it  is  very  likely  that  where  we  find  a  land  of  scat- 
tered steads  and  of  isolated  hamlets,  there  the  Germanic  conquerors 
have  spared  or  have  been  unable  to  subdue  the  Britons  or  have 
adapted  their  own  arrangements  to  the  exterior  framework  that 
was  provided  by  Celtic  or  Roman  agriculture,  still,  until  Meitzen 
has  been  refuted,  we  are  compelled  to  say  that  our  true  villages, 
the  nucleated  villages  with  large  "open  fields,"  are  not  Celtic,  are 
not  Roman,  but  are  very  purely  and  typically  Germu.ii.  But  this 
is  not  all.  Hereafter  we  shall  urge  some  other  objections.  The 
doctrine  in  question  will  give  no  rational  explanation  of  the  state 
of  things  that  is  revealed  to  us  by  the  Domesday  Survey  of  the 
northern  and  eastern  counties,  and  it  will  give  no  rational  explana- 
tion of  seignorial  justice.  This  being  so,  we  seem  bound  to  sup- 
pose that  at  one  time  there  was  a  large  class  of  peasant  proprie- 
tors, that  is,  of  free  men  who  tilled  the  soil  that  they  owned,  and  to 
discuss  the  process  which  substitutes  for  peasant  proprietorship  the 
manorial  organization. 

§  3.   Feudalism  not  Retrogression 

Though  we  cannot  deal  at  any  length  with  a  matter  which  lies 
outside  the  realm  of  legal  history,  we  ought  at  once  to  explain  that 
we  need  not  regard  this  change  as  a  retrogression.  There  are 
indeed  historians  who  have  not  yet  abandoned  the  habit  of  speak- 
ing of  feudalism  as  though  it  were  a  disease  of  the  body  politic. 
Now  the  word  "feudalism"  is  and  always  will  be  an  inexact  term, 
and,  no  doubt,  at  various  times  and  places  there  emerge  phenomena 
which  may  with  great  propriety  be  called  feudal,  and  which  come 
of  evil  and  make  for  evil.  But  if  we  use  the  term,  and  often  we 
do,  in  a  very  wide  sense,  if  we  describe  several  centuries  as  feudal, 
then  feudalism  will  appear  to  us  as  a  natural  and  even  a  necessary 
stage  in  our  history;  that  is  to  say,  if  we  would  have  the  England 
of  the  sixteenth  century  arise  out  of  the  England  of  the  eighth 
without  passing  through  a  period  of  feudalism,  we  must  suppose 
many  immense  and  fundamental  changes  in  the  nature  of  man 
and  his  surroundings. 

If  we  use  the  term  in  this  wide  sense,  then  (the  barbarian  con- 
quests being  given  us  as  an  unalterable  fact)  feudalism  means 
civilization,  the  separation  of  employments,  the  division  of  labor, 
the  possibility  of  national  defence,  the  possibility  of  art, 
science,  literature,  and  learned  leisure;  the  cathedral,  the  scrip- 
torium, the  library,  are  as  truly  the  works  of  feudalism  as  is  the 


Two  Theories  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Conquest        5 

baronial  castle.  When  therefore  we  speak,  as  we  shall  have  to 
speak,  of  forces  which  make  for  the  subjection  of  the  peasantry 
to  seignorial  justice  and  which  substitute  the  manor  with  its 
villeins  for  the  free  village,  we  shall  —  so  at  least  it  seems  to  us  — 
be  speaking  not  of  abnormal  forces,  not  of  retrogression,  not  of 
disease,  but  in  the  main  of  normal  and  healthy  growth.  Far 
from  us  indeed  is  the  cheerful  optimism  which  refuses  to  see  that 
the  process  of  civilization  is  often  a  cruel  process;  but  the  Eng- 
land of  the  eleventh  century  is  nearer  to  the  England  of  the  nine- 
teenth than  is  the  England  of  the  seventh  —  nearer  by  just  four 
hundred  years. 


CHAPTER  II 

OLD    BRITAIN   AND   THE   ANGLO-SAXON    CONQUEST 

AMONG  the  historians  who  have  adhered  to  the  Teutonic  theory 
of  the  Anglo-Saxon  conquest,  Dr.  Stubbs  stands  preeminent  for 
the  most  cautious  and  scholarly  statement  of  the  case.  Like  Green 
and  others,  he  believed  that  the  origins  of  English  institutions  were 
to  be  sought  in  the  forests  of  Germany  and,  dismissing  the  old 
British  and  Roman  periods  with  a  few  paragraphs,  he  devoted  two 
chapters  to  the  Germans  in  their  continental  home  before  taking 
up  English  history  in  Britain.  His  chapter  on  the  migration  and 
conquest  contains  the  main  points  of  his  argument  in  the  con- 
troversy, and  it  would  be  an  interesting  and  profitable  exercise 
for  the  student  to  turn  to  the  original  volume  and  examine  the  evi- 
dence upon  which  the  conclusions  rest. 

§  i.  Conquest  of  Gaul  and  Britain  Contrasted1 

The  fifth  century  saw  the  foundation  of  the  Frank  dominion  in 
Gaul,  and  the  first  establishment  of  the  German  races  in  Britain. 
The  former  was  effected  in  a  single  long  reign,  by  the  energy  of 
one  great  ruling  tribe,  which  had  already  modified  its  traditional 
usages,  and  now,  by  the  adoption  of  the  language  and  religion  of 
the  conquered,  prepared  the  way  for  a  permanent  amalgamation 
with  them.  In  this  process,  whilst  the  dominant  tribe  wa-  to 
impose  a  new  mould  upon  the  material  which  Roman  dominion 
had  reduced  to  a  plastic  mass,  it  was  in  its  turn  to  taki-  forms  which 
but  for  the  pertinacious  idiosyncracy  of  the  Gallic  genius,  and  the 
Roman  training  to  which  it  had  been  subjected,  it  would  never 
have  taken.  .  .  . 

The  Saxons,  Angles,  and  Jutes,  although  speaking  the  same 
language,  worshipping  the  same  gods,  and  using  the  same  laws, 
had  no  political  unity  like  the  Franks  of  Clovis;  they  were  not 

1  Stubbs,  Constitutional  History  of  England,  Vol.  I,  pp.  63  ff.  By  per- 
mission of  the  Delegates  of  the  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford. 

6 


Old  Britain  and  the  Anglo-Saxon  Conquest      7 

moved  by  one  impulse  or  invited  by  one  opportunity.  The  con- 
quest of  Britain  was  the  result  of  a  series  of  separate  expeditions, 
long  continued  and  perhaps,  in  point  of  time,  continuous,  but  un- 
connected, and  independent  of  one  another.  It  was  conducted 
by  single  chieftains,  who  had  nothing  whatever  in  common  with 
the  nations  they  attacked,  and  who  were  about  neither  to 
amalgamate  with  them  nor  to  tolerate  their  continued  existence. 
They  were  men,  too,  on  whom  the  charm  of  the  Roman  name  had 
no  power,  and  whose  institutions  were  more  than  those  of  the  rest 
of  the  barbarians,  free  from  Roman  influences ;  for  three  centuries 
after  the  conquest  the  Saxons  in  Germany  were  still  a  pure  nation- 
ality, unconquered  by  the  Franks,  untainted  by  Roman  manners, 
and  still  heathen. 

These  separate  expeditions  had  doubtless  changed  their  char- 
acter in  course  of  time.  Beginning  as  mere  piratical  visitations 
of  the  coast,  —  such  as  were  those  of  the  Danes  and  Norsemen  at  a 
later  period,  —  they  had  before  the  end  of  the  third  century  called 
forth  the  defensive  powers  of  Rome,  and  taxed  the  energies  of 
the  count  of  the  Saxon  shore.  It  is  not  until  the  middle  of  the  fifth 
century  that  they  assume  the  dimensions  of  conquest,  colonization, 
migration ;  and  when  they  have  attained  that  character,  the  prog- 
ress and  success  of  the  several  attempts  are  not  uniform ;  each  little 
state  reaches  greatness  by  its  own  route,  and  the  history  of  its 
growth  makes  a  mark  upon  its  constitution. 

If  the  Saxons  and  Angles  are  contrasted  with  the  Franks,  still 
more  are  the  Britons  with  the  Gauls.  Rome  had  laid  a  very  strong 
hand  on  Gaul,  and  Gaul  had  repaid  in  a  remarkable  degree  the 
cultivation  of  her  masters.  .  .  .  Britain  had  been  occupied  by 
the  Romans,  but  had  not  become  Roman ;  their  formative  and  cul- 
tivating power  had  affected  the  land  rather  than  the  owners  of  it. 
Here,  too,  had  been  splendid  cities,  Christian  churches,  noble 
public  works,  and  private  mansions ;  but  whatever  amount  of  real 
union  may  have  existed  between  the  two  populations  ended  when 
the  legions  were  withdrawn.  The  Britons  forgot  the  Latin  tongue ; 
their  clergy  lost  all  sympathy  with  the  growth  of  religious  thought ; 
the  arts  of  war  had  been  disused,  and  the  arts  of  peace  never 
thoroughly  learned.  The  old  tribal  divisions,  which  had  never 
been  really  extinguished  by  Roman  rule,  rose  from  their  hiding- 
places  ;  and  Britain  was  as  fertile  in  tyrants  after  the  Roman  con- 
quest as  it  was  before  it. 

But  Roman  rule  had  disarmed  and  enervated  the  people;  con- 
stant foreign  invasion  found  them  constantly  unprepared,  and  with- 


8  English  Historians 


out  hope  or  energy  for  resistance.  They  could  not  utilize  the 
public  works  or  defend  the  cities  of  their  masters.  So  Britain  was 
easy  to  be  conquered  in  proportion  as  it  was  Romanized.  A  suc- 
cession of  calamities  had  diminished  the  population,  already 
greatly  reduced  by  the  withdrawal  of  the  dependents  of  the  Ro- 
mans into  Gaul;  and,  when  once  the  invitation  or  the  con- 
cessions of  the  British  chiefs  had  given  the  invaders  a  standing 
ground  in  the  island,  the  occupation  of  the  eastern  half  at  least  was 
accomplished  in  a  short  time. 

§  2.   Character  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Conquest 

The  middle  of  the  fifth  century  is  the  approved  date  for  the 
settlement.  Kent  seems  to  have  been  won  by  a  single  victory; 
the  kingdom  of  Sussex  was  the  result  of  the  capture  of  Anderida ; 
the  history  of  Wessex  is  the  long  story  of  encroachments  on  the 
native  people,  who  retired  very  gradually,  but  became  stronger  in 
resistance  as  they  approached  the  mountains  and  the  western  sea, 
until  a  balance  of  forces  compelled  an  armed  peace.  Mercia,  the 
country  of  the  Southern  and  Middle  Angles,  was  an  aggrega- 
tion of  many  smaller  settlements,  ejJbh  apparently  the  result  of 
detached  Anglian  expeditions.  Of  the  formation  of  the  Northum- 
brian and  East  Anglian  kingdoms  we  have  scarcely  any  of  those 
legendary  data,  which,  whether  historical  or  not,  serve  to  give 
an  individuality  to  the  others;  but  such  traditions  as  have  been 
preserved  lead  to  the  belief  that  in  both  cases  the  kingdom  was 
created  by  the  union  of  smaller  separate  conquests. 

The  dislocated  state  of  Britain  seems,  next  to  its  desertion  by 
the  Romans,  to  have  made  way  for  the  conquerors.  The  same 
weak  obstinacy  which  had  failed  to  combine  against  invasion, 
refused  to  accept  the  new  dominion;  and  the  Saxons,  merciless 
by  habit,  were  provoked  by  the  sullen  and  treacherous  attitude 
of  their  victims.  The  Britons  fled  from  their  homes:  whom  the 
sword  spared,  famine  and  pestilence  devoured;  the  few  that 
remained  either  refused  or  failed  altogether  to  civilize  the  con- 
querors. For  a  century  and  a  half  after  their  arrival  the  Saxons 
remained  heathen ;  for  a  century  after  their  conversion  they  were 
repelled  from  communion  with  the  Celts;  the  Britons  retarded 
rather  than  promoted  the  religious  change  which  the  Spaniards 
forced  on  the  Arian  conquerors,  and  which  Clovis  voluntarily 
adopted  to  unite  him  with  his  Gallic  subjects.  This  period,  in- 
stead of  beingoneof  amalgamation,  was  one  of  divarication.  There 
was  room  enough  for  both  Britons  and  Saxons :  the  Roman  cities 


Old  Britain  and  the  Anglo-Saxon  Conquest       9 

might  have  been  homes  for  the  one  and  the  woods  and  broad  pas- 
tures have  furnished  the  others  with  their  favorite  prospects.  But 
the  cities  went  to  ruin;  Christianity  became  extinct,  and  all 
culture  with  it.  There  were  still  Roman  roads  leading  to  the  walls 
and  towers  of  empty  cities;  the  Roman  divisions  of  the  land  were 
conspicuous:  the  intrenched  and  fortified  camps,  the  great  villas 
of  the  princely  families,  churches,  and  burial-places,  but  they 
were  become,  before  the  days  of  Bede,  mere  haunted  ruins,  some- 
thing like  the  mysterious  fabrics  which  in  Central  America  tell 
of  the  rule  of  a  mighty  race  whose  name  is  forgotten. 

§  3.    British  and  Roman  Survivals 

It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  this  desolation  was  uniform ;  in 
some  of  the  cities  there  were  probably  elements  of  continuous 
life.  London  the  mart  of  the  merchants,  York  the  capital  of  the 
North,  and  some  others  have  a  continuous  political  existence,  al- 
though they  wisely  do  not  venture,  like  some  of  the  towns  of  South- 
ern France,  to  claim  an  unbroken  succession  from  Roman  munici- 
palities. The  new  race  found  the  convenience  of  ready-built 
houses  and  accumulated  stores  of  material;  and  wherever  the 
cities  were  spared,  a  portion  at  least  of  the  city  population  must 
have  continued  also.  In  the  country,  too,  especially  toward  the 
West  and  the  debatable  border,  great  numbers  of  Britons  may 
have  survived  in  servile  or  half-servile  condition;  some  few  of 
the  greater  men  may  have  made,  and  probably  did  make,  terms 
for  themselves,  especially  in  the  districts  appropriated  by  the 
smaller  detachments  of  adventurers;  and  the  public  lands  of  the 
new  kingdoms  must  have  required  native  cultivators.  But  all 
these  probabilities  only  bring  out  more  strongly  the  improbability 
of  any  general  commixture  or  amalgamation  of  the  races.  Cen- 
turies after  the  conquest  the  Briton  by  extraction  was  distin- 
guished by  his  wergild  from  the  man  of  the  ruling  race.  It  is 
impossible  that  such  a  commixture  could  have  taken  place  with- 
out leaving  its  traces  on  the  languages  or  the  religion.  The  Eng- 
lish of  Alfred's  time  is,  except  where  the  common  terms  of  eccle- 
siastical language  come  in,  purely  Germanic;  British  Christianity 
stood  out  against  Saxon  for  a  century  after  the  death  of  Augustine; 
and  the  vestiges  of  Romano-British  law  which  have  filtered  through 
local  custom  into  the  common  law  of  England,  as  distinct  from 
those  which  were  imported  in  the  Middle  Ages  through  the  scien- 
tific study  of  law  or  the  insensible  infection  of  cosmopolitan  civili- 
zation, are  infinitesimal.  .  .  . 


io  English  Historians 

§  4.    Two  Important  Results  o/  the  Conquest. 

If  it  were  possible  to  form  a  clear  idea  of  the  amount  of  civili- 
zation which  the  invaders  already  possessed,  or  of  the  organiza- 
tion which  they  were  to  substitute  for  that  which  thus  vanished 
before  them,  we  should  be  better  able  to  determine  the  effect  whicn 
was  produced  on  them  by  the  process  of  conquest.  But  as  it. 
is,  only  two  great  generalizations  seem  possible.  In  the  first 
place,  Qpnquest  under  the  circumstances  compelled  colonization 
and  migration.  The  wives  and  families  were  necessary  to  the 
'comfort  and  continued  existence  of  the  settlements.  It  was  not 
only  that  the  attitude  of  the  Britons  forbade  intermarriages;  the 
Saxons,  as  all  testimony  has  shown,  declined  the  connubium  of 
foreign  races;  they  could  not  give  to  the  strange  woman  the  sacred 
prerogative  of  the  German  woman,  let  her  cast  their  lots  or  rear 
their  children.  The  tie  of  the  cognalio  and  the  gens  was  as  strong 
as  it  had  been  of  old ;  the  new  settlements  were  called  by  Gentile 
names,  and  these  names  involved  the  retention  of  the  rights  and 
duties  of  the  maegth,  the  kindred.  The  invaders  came  in  fami- 
lies and  kindred,  and  in  the  full  organization  of  their  tribes;  the 
three  ranks  of  men,  the  noble,  the  freeman,  and  the  laet.  .  .  . 

The  process  of  migration  and  conquest  must  have  produced 
royalty,  and  the  important  political  appurtenances  of  royalty. 
The  Saxons  had  no  kings  at  home,  but  they  created  kingdoms  in 
Britain.  The  testimony  of  tradition  helps  to  confirm  what  is 
a  sufficiently  safe  inference.  According  to  the  Chronicle  the 
Brito-Welsh  in  A.D.  443  invited  to  Britain  the  Ethelings  of  the 
Angles;  in  A.D.  449  under  two  heretogas,  Hengist  and  Horsa, 
the  strangers  came;  in  A.D.  455  Hengist  and  Aesc  his  son  came 
to  the  kingdom.  In  A.D.  495  "  came  two  ealdormtn  to  Britain, 
Cerdic  and  Cynric  ";  in  A.D.  519  they  became  kings  of  the  West 
Saxons.  In  Northumbria  and  East  Anglia,  when  the  "proceres" 
had  in  long  rivalry  occupied  provinces  and  fought  battles,  they 
set  up  out  of  the  most  noble  a  king  over  them.  In  each  case  the 
erection  of  the  throne  was  probably  the  result  of  some  great  vic- 
tory, or  of  the  permanent  securing  of  a  definite  territory;  but  the 
institution  was  not  a  transference  of  British  royalty;  the  new  kings 
are  kings  of  the  nations  which  they  had  led  to  conquest,  not  of  those 
they  had  conquered.  In  each  case  the  son  is  named  with  his  father 
as  sharing  in  the  first  assumption  of  the  title,  a  recognition  of  the 
hereditary  character  which  is  almost  the  only  mark  distinguishing 
the  German  kingship  from  the  elective  chieftainship.  The  royal 


Old  Britain  and  the  Anglo-Saxon  Conquest       1 1 

houses  thus  founded  assume  a  divine  pedigree;  all  trace  their 
origin  to  Woden ;  and  when  they  become  extinct  the  independence 
of  their  nation  comes  to  an  end. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE  j 

Maitland,  Domesday  Book  and  Beyond.  Vinogradoff,  The  Growth  of  the 
Manor.  Seebohm,  The  English  Village  Community.  Fustel  de  Coulanges, 
Origin  of  Property  in  Land,  especially  the  introductory  essay  by  Professor 
Ashley.  ^Stubbs,  Lectures  on  Early  English  History,  chap.  x.  Coote, 
The  Romans  in  Britain,  supporting  the  theory  of  the  Roman  survival.  Guest, 
Early  English  Settlements.  Freeman,  Four  Oxford  Lectures  (1888),  defend- 
ing the  Teutonic  theory.  Hodgkin,  Political  History  of  England  to  1066, 
chap.  vi.  Haverfield,  Early  British  Christianity,  in  the  English  Historical 
Review,  1896,  pp.  429  ff.  Brief  summary  of  the  conflicting  views  in  Med- 
ley, Constitutional  History  of  England,  introductory  chapter. 


CHAPTER  HI 

ADOPTION    OF    CHRISTIANITY    AND    UNIFICATION    OF    ENGLAND 

WHATEVER  may  have  been  the  nature  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  con- 
quest and  settlement,  the  immediate  political  result  was  the 
foundation  of  several  petty  tribal  states  among  which  there  en- 
sued three  centuries  of  warfare  for  supremacy.  Dull  as  the 
annals  of  these  three  hundred  years  are,  the  period  was  never- 
theless one  of  great  importance  in  the  building  of  the  English 
nation.  The  heathen  conquerors  were  converted  to  Christianity, 
Britain  was  brought  into  close  relations  with  Rome,  a  well- 
planned  ecclesiastical  system  was  founded,  monks  began  there 
the  work  of  civilization,  the  arts  of  peace  flourished  in  spite  of 
the  conflicts,  and  learning  increased.  Doubtless  the  most  vivid 
and  interesting  account  of  this  period  is  to  be  found  in  John 
Richard  Green's  Short  History  0}  the  English  People. 

§  i.  Rise  0}  Kent  and  Landing  o/  Augustine1 

The  conquest  of  the  bulk  of  Britain  was  now  complete  (ca.  588). 
Eastward  of  a  line  which  may  be  roughly  drawn  along  the  moor- 
lands of  Northumberland  and  Yorkshire,  through  Derbyshire 
and  skirting  the  Forest  of  Arden  to  the  mouth  of  the  Severn,  and 
thence  by  Mendip  to  the  sea,  the  island  had  passed  into  English 
hands.  From  this  time  the  character  of  the  English  conquest  of 
Britain  was  wholly  changed.  The  older  wars  of  extermination 
came  to  an  end,  and  as  the  invasion  pushed  westward  in  later  times 
the  Britons  were  no  longer  wholly  driven  from  the  soil,  but  mingled 
with  their  conquerors.  A  far  more  important  change  was  that 
which  was  seen  in  the  attitude  of  the  English  conquerors  from  this 
time  toward  each  other.  Freed  to  a  great  extent  from  the  com- 
mon pressure  of  the  war  against  the  Britons,  their  energies 

1  Green,  Short  HixUtry  oj  the  English  People,  pp.  26  ff.  By  permission 
of  Mrs.  John  Richard  Green. 

12 


Adoption  of  Christianity  13 

turned  to  combats  with  one  another,  to  a  long  struggle  for  over- 
lordship  which  was  to  end  in  bringing  about  a  real  national 
unity. 

The  West-Saxons,  beaten  back  from  their  advance  along  the 
Severn  valley,  and  overthrown  in  a  terrible  defeat  at  Faddiley, 
were  torn  by  internal  dissensions,  even  while  they  were  battling 
for  life  against  the  Britons.  Strife  between  the  two  rival  king- 
doms of  Bernicia  and  Deira  in  the  north  absorbed  the  power  of 
the  Engle  in  that  quarter,  till  in  588  the  strength  of  Deira  suddenly 
broke  down,  and  the  Bernician  king,  ^thelric,  gathered  the  two 
peoples  into  a  realm  which  was  to  form  the  later  kingdom  of  Nor- 
thumbria.  Amid  the  confusion  of  north  and  south  the  primacy 
among  the  conquerors  was  seized  by  Kent,  where  the  kingdom  of 
the  Jutes  rose  suddenly  into  greatness  under  a  king  called  ^Ethel- 
berht,  who  before  597  established  his  supremacy  over  the  Saxons 
of  Middlesex  and  Essex,  as  well  as  over  the  English  of  East  Anglia 
and  of  Mercia  as  far  north  as  the  Humber  and  the  Trent. 

The  overlordship  of  ^thelberht  was  marked  by  a  renewal  of 
that  intercourse  of  Britain  with  the  Continent  which  had  been 
broken  off  by  the  conquests  of  the  English.  His  marriage  with 
Bertha,  the  daughter  of  the  Prankish  King  Charibert  of  Paris, 
created  a  fresh  tie  between  Kent  and  Gaul.  But  the  union  had 
far  more  important  results  than  those  of  which  ^thelberht  may 
have  dreamed.  Bertha,  like  her  Prankish  kinsfolk,  was  a  Chris- 
tian. A  Christian  bishop  accompanied  her  from  Gaul  to  Canter- 
bury, the  royal  city  of  the  kingdom  of  Kent ;  and  a  ruined  Chris- 
tian Church,  the  Church  of  St.  Martin,  was  given  them  for  their 
worship.  The  marriage  of  Bertha  was  an  opportunity  which  was 
at  once  seized  by  the  bishop,  who  at  this  time  occupied  the  Roman 
See,  and  who  is  justly  known  as  Gregory  the  Great.  A  memo- 
rable story  tells  us  how,  when  but  a  young  Roman  deacon, 
Gregory  had  noted  the  white  bodies,  the  fair  faces,  the  golden 
hair  of  some  youths  who  stoocUbound  in  the  market-place  of  Rome. 
"From  what  country  do  these  slaves  come?"  he  asked  the  traders 
who  brought  them.  "They  are  English,  Angles!"  the  slave 
dealers  answered.  The  deacon's  pity  veiled  itself  in  poetic 
humor.  "Not  Angles  but  Angels,"  he  said,  "with  faces  so  angel- 
like!  From  what  country  come  they?"  "They  come,"  said  the 
merchants,  "from  Deira."  "De  ira!"  was  the  untranslatable 
reply,  "aye,  plucked  from  God's  ire,  and  called  to  Christ's  mercy! 
And  what  is  the  name  of  their  king?"  "/Ella,"  they  told  him; 
and  Gregory  seized  on  the  words  as  of  good  omen.  "Alleluia 


14  English  Historians 

shall  be  sung  in  /Ella's  land!"  he  cried,  and  passed  on,  musing 
how  the  angel  faces  should  be  brought  to  sing  it. 

Only  three  or  four  years  had  gone  by  when  the  deacon  had 
become  bishop  of  Rome,  and  Bertha's  marriage  gave  him  the  open- 
ing he  sought.  After  cautious  negotiations  with  the  rulers  of 
Gaul,  he  sent  a  Roman  abbot,  Augustine,  at  the  head  of  a  band 
of  monks,  to  preach  the  gospel  to  the  English  people.  The  mis- 
sionaries landed  in  597  on  the  very  spot  where  Hengist  had  landed 
more  than  a  century  before  in  the  Isle  of  Thanet;  and  the  king 
received  them  sitting  in  the  open  air  on  the  chalk -down  above 
Minster,  where  the  eye  nowadays  catches  miles  away  over  the 
marshes  the  dim  tower  of  Canterbury.  He  listened  to  the  long 
sermon  as  the  interpreters  whom  Augustine  had  brought  with  him 
from  Gaul  translated  it.  "Your  words  are  fair,"  ^Ethelberht  re- 
plied at  last,  with  English  good  sense;  "but  they  are  new  and  of 
doubtful  meaning";  for  himself,  he  said,  he  refused  to  forsake 
the  gods  of  his  fathers,  but  he  promised  shelter  and  protection  to 
the  strangers.  The  band  of  monks  entered  Canterbury,  bearing 
before  them  a  silver  cross  with  a  picture  of  Christ,  and  singing  in 
concert  the  strains  of  the  litany  of  their  Church.  "Turn  from  this 
city,  Lord,"  they  sang,  "Thine  anger  and  wrath,  and  turn  it 
from  Thy  holy  house,  for  we  have  sinned."  And  then  in  strange 
contrast  came  the  jubilant  cry  of  the  older  Hebrew  worship,  the 
cry  which  Gregory  had  wrested  in  prophetic  earnestness  from  the 
name  of  the  Yorkshire  king  in  the  Roman  market-place,  "Alle- 
luia." 

It  is  strange  that  the  spot  which  witnessed  the  landing  of  Hen- 
gist  should  be  yet  better  known  as  the  landing  place  of  Augus- 
tine. But  the  second  landing  at  Ebbsfleet  was  in  no  small  meas- 
ure the  reversal  and  undoing  of  the  first.  "  Strangers  from  Rome  " 
was  the  title  with  which  the  missionaries  first  fronted  the  English 
king.  The  march  of  the  monks  as  they  chanted  their  solemn 
litany  was,  in  one  sense,  the  return  g,f  the  Roman  legions  who  had 
retired  at  the  trumpet-call  of  Alaric.  It  was  to  the  tongue  and 
the  thought  not  of  Gregory  only  but  of  such  men  as  his  own  Jutish 
fathers  had  slaughtered  and  driven  over  the  sea  that  /Ethelberht 
listened  in  the  preaching  of  Augustine.  Canterbury,  the  earliest 
royal  city  of  the  new  England,  became  the  centre  of  Latin  influence. 
The  Roman  tongue  became  again  one  of  the  tongues  of  Britain, 
the  language  of  its  worship,  its  correspondence,  its  literature. 
But  more  than  the  tongue  of  Rome  returned  with  Augustine. 
Practically  his  landing  renewed  the  union  with  the  Western  world 


Adoption  of  Christianity  15 

which  the  landing  of  Hengist  had  all  but  destroyed.  The  new 
England  was  admitted  into  the  older  commonwealth  of  nations. 
The  civilization,  arts,  letters,  which  had  fled  before  the  sword 
of  the  English  conquest,  returned  with  the  Christian  faith.  The 
fabric  of  the  Roman  law  indeed  never  took  root  in  England,  but 
it  is  impossible  not  to  recognize  the  result  of  the  influence  of  the 
Roman  missionaries  in  the  fact  that  the  codes  of  customary  Eng- 
lish law  began  to  be  put  into  writing  soon  after  their  arrival. 

As  yet  these  great  results  were  still  distant ;  a  year  passed  before 
^thelberht  yielded,  and  though  after  his  conversion  thousands  of 
Kentish  men  crowded  to  baptism,  it  was  years  before  he  ventured 
to  urge  the  under-kings  of  Essex  and  East  Anglia  to  receive  the 
creed  of  their  overlord.  The  effort  of  ^Ethelberht,  however,  only 
heralded  a  revolution  which  broke  the  power  of  Kent  forever. 
The  tribes  of  mid-Britain  revolted  against  his  supremacy,  and 
gathered  under  the  overlordship  of  Raedwald  of  East  Anglia. 
The  revolution  clearly  marked  the  change  which  had  passed 
over  Britain.  Instead  of  a  chaos  of  isolated  peoples,  the  con- 
querors were  now,  in  fact,  gathered  into  three  great  groups.  The 
Engle  kingdom  of  the  north  reached  from  the  Humber  to  the  Forth. 
The  southern  kingdom  of  the  West-Saxons  stretched  from  Watling 
Street  to  the  Channel.  And  between  these  was  roughly  sketched 
out  the  great  kingdom  of  mid-Britain,  which,  however  its  limits 
may  vary,  retained  a  substantial  identity  from  the  time  of  ^Ethel- 
berht  to  the  final  fall  of  the  Mercian  kings.  For  the  next  two 
hundred  years  the  history  of  England  lies  in  the  struggle  of  Nor- 
thumbrian, Mercian,  and  West-Saxon  kings  to  establish  their  su- 
premacy over  the  general  mass  of  Englishmen,  and  unite  them 
in' a  single  England. 

§  2.   Supremacy  and  Conversion  of  Northumbria 

In  this  struggle,  the  lead  was  at  once  taken  by  Northumbria, 
which  was  rising  into  a  power  that  set  all  rivalry  at  defiance. 
Under  ^thelfrith,  who  had  followed  yEthelric  in  593,  the  work 
of  conquest  went  on  rapidly.  In  603  the  forces  of  the  northern 
Britons  were  annihilated  in  a  great  battle  at  Daegsastan,  and  the 
rule  of  Northumbria  was  established  from  the  Humber  to  the  Forth. 
Along  the  west  of  Britain  there  stretched  the  unconquered  king- 
doms of  Strathclyde  and  Cumbria,  which  extended  from  the 
river  Clyde  to  the  Dee,  and  the  smaller  British  states  which  oc- 
cupied what  we  now  call  Wales.  Chester  formed  the  link  between 


1 6  English  Historians 

these  two  bodies;  and  it  was  Chester  that  ^Ethelfrith  chose  in 
613  for  his  next  point  of  attack.  Some  miles  from  the  city  two 
thousand  monks  were  gathered  in  the  monastery  of  Bangor,  and 
after  imploring  in  a  three  days'  fast  the  help  of  Heaven  for  their 
country,  a  crowd  of  these  ascetics  followed  the  British  army  to 
the  field,  ^thelfrith  watched  the  wild  gestures  and  outstretched 
arms  of  the  strange  company  as  it  stood  apart,  intent  upon  prayer, 
and  took  the  monks  for  enchanters.  "Bear  they  arms  or  no," 
said  the  king,  "they  war  against  us  when  they  cry  against  us  to 
their  God,"  and  in  the  surprise  and  rout  which  followed  the  monks 
were  the  first  to  fall. 

The  British  kingdoms  were  now  utterly  parted  from  one  another. 
By  their  victory  at  Deorham  the  West-Saxons  had  cut  off  the 
Britons  of  Devon  and  Cornwall  from  the  general  body  of  their 
race.  By  his  victory  at  Chester,  ^thelfrith  broke  this  body 
again  into  two  several  parts,  by  parting  the  Britons  of  Wales  from 
those  of  Cumbria  and  Strathclyde.  From  this  time  the  warfare 
of  Briton  and  Englishman  died  down  into  a  warfare  of  separate 
English  kingdoms  against  separate  British  kingdoms,  of  North- 
umbria  against  Cumbria  and  Strathclyde,  of  Mercia  against 
modern  Wales,  of  Wessex  against  the  tract  of  British  country 
from  Mendip  to  the  Land's  End. ... 

The  greatness  of  Northumbria  reached  its  height  under  Ead- 
wine  (617-633).  Within  his  own  dominions  Eadwine  displayed 
a  genius  for  civil  government  which  shows  how  completely  the 
mere  age  of  the  conquest  had  passed  away.  With  him  began  the 
English  proverb  so  often  applied  to  after  kings,  "A  woman  with 
her  babe  might  walk  scatheless  from  sea  to  sea  in  Eadwine's 
day."  Peaceful  communication  revived  along  the  deserted  high- 
ways; the  springs  by  the  roadside  were  marked  with  stakes,  and  a 
cup  of  brass  set  beside  each  for  the  traveller's  refreshment.  Some 
faint  traditions  of  the  Roman  past  may  have  flung  their  glory 
round  this  new  "Empire  of  the  English";  some  of  its  majesty 
had  at  any  rate  come  back  with  its  long-lost  peace.  A  royal 
standard  of  purple  and  gold  floated  before  Eadwine  as  he  rode 
through  the  villages;  a  feather-tuft  attached  to  a  spear,  the  Roman 
tufa,  preceded  him  as  he  walked  through  the  streets.  The  North- 
umbrian king  was,  in  fact,  supreme  over  Britain  as  no  king  of 
English  blood  had  been  before.  Northward  his  frontier  reached 
the  Forth,  and  was  guarded  by  a  city  which  bore  his  name,  Edin- 
burgh, Eadwine's  burgh,  the  city  of  Eadwine.  Westward,  he 
was  master  of  Chester,  and  the  fleet  he  equipped  there  subdued 


Adoption  of  Christianity  17 

the  isles  of  Anglesey  and  Man.  South  of  the  Humber  he  was 
owned  as  overlord  by  the  whole  English  race,  save  Kent ;  and  even 
Kent  was  bound  to  him  by  his  marriage  with  its  king's  sister. 

With  the  Kentish  queen  came  Paulinus,  one  of  Augustine's 
followers,  whose  tall,  stooping  form,  slender  aquiline  nose,  and 
black  hair  falling  round  a  thin  worn  face,  were  long  remembered 
in  the  north;  and  the  Wise  Men  of  Northumbria  gathered  to 
deliberate  on  the  new  faith  to  which  Paulinus  and  his  queen  soon 
converted  Eadwine.  To  finer  minds  its  charm  lay  in  the  light 
it  threw  on  the  darkness  which  encompassed  men's  lives,  the 
darkness  of  the  future  as  of  the  past.  "So  seems  the  life  of  man, 
O  king,"  burst  forth  an  aged  Ealdorman,  "as  a  sparrow's  flight 
through  the  hall  when  you  are  sitting  at  meat  in  winter-tide,  with 
the  warm  fire  lighted  on  the  hearth,  but  the  icy  rain-storm  with- 
out. The  sparrow  flies  in  at  one  door  and  tarries  for  a  moment 
in  the  light  and  heat  of  the  hearth-fire,  and  then  flying  forth  from 
the  other,  vanishes  into  the  wintry  darkness  whence  it  came.  So 
tarries  for  a  moment  the  life  of  man  in  our  sight ;  but  what  is  before 
it,  what  after  it,  we  know  not.  If  this  new  teaching  tells  us  aught 
certainly  of  these,  let  us  follow  it."  Coarser  argument  told  on 
the  crowd.  "None  of  your  people,  Eadwine,  have  worshipped 
the  gods  more  busily  than  I,"  said  Coifi  the  priest,  "yet  there 
are  many  more  favored  and  more  fortunate.  Were  these  gods 
good  for  anything,  they  would  help  their  worshippers."  Then, 
leaping  on  horseback,  he  hurled  his  spear  into  the  sacred  temple 
at  Godmanham,  and  with  the  rest  of  the  Witan  embraced  the 
religion  of  the  king.  .  .  . 

§  3.    The  Irish  Church  and  the  Synod  of  Whitby 

It  was  not  the  Church  of  Paulinus  which  in  after  years  nerved 
Oswald  to  the  struggle  for  the  cross,  when  he  succeeded  to  the 
torn  kingdom  of  Northumbria.  Paulinus  had  fled  from  Northum- 
bria at  Eadwine's  fall;  and  the  Roman  Church  in  Kent  shrank 
into  inactivity  before  the  heathen  reaction.  Its  place  in  the  con- 
version of  England  was  taken  by  missionaries  from  Ireland.  To 
understand,  however,  the  true  meaning  of  the  change,  we  must 
remember  that  before  the  landing  of  the  English  in  Britain, 
the  Christian  Church  comprised  every  country,  save  Germany, 
in  Western  Europe,  as  far  as  Ireland  itself.  The  conquest  of 
Britain  by  the  pagan  English  thrust  a  wedge  of  heathendom  into 
the  heart  of  this  great  communion,  and  broke  it  into  two  unequal 


1 8  English  Historians 

parts.  On  the  one  side  lay  Italy,  Spain,  and  Gaul,  whose  churches 
owned  obedience  to  the  See  of  Rome,  on  the  other  the  Church 
of  Ireland.  But  the  condition  of  the  two  portions  of  Western 
Christendom  was  very  different.  While  the  vigor  of  Christianity 
in  Italy  and  Gaul  and  Spain  was  exhausted  in  a  bare  struggle 
for  life,  Ireland,  which  remained  unscourged  by  invaders,  drew 
from  its  conversion  an  energy  such  as  it  has  never  known  since. 

Christianity  had  been  received  there  with  a  burst  of  popular 
enthusiasm,  and  letters  and  arts  sprang  up  rapidly  in  its  train. 
The  science  and  Biblical  knowledge  which  fled  from  the  Conti- 
nent took  refuge  in  famous  schools,  which  made  Durrow  awl  Ar- 
magh the  universities  of  the  West.  The  new  Christian  life  soon 
beat  too  strongly  to  brook  confinement  within  the  bounds  of  Ire- 
land itself.  Patrick,  the  first  missionary  of  the  island,  had  not  been 
half  a  century  dead  when  Irish  Christianity  flung  itself  with  a 
fiery  zeal  into  battle  with  the  mass  of  heathenism  which  was 
rolling  in  upon  the  Christian  world.  Irish  missionaries  labored 
among  the  Picts  of  the  Highlands  and  among  the  Frisians  of  the 
northern  seas.  An  Irish  missionary,  Columban,  founded  mon- 
asteries in  Burgundy  and  the  Apennines.  The  canton  of  St. 
Gall  still  commemorates  in  its  name  another  Irish  missionary 
before  whom  the  spirits  of  flood  and  fell  fled  wailing  over  the  waters 
of  the  Lake  of  Constance.  For  a  time  it  seemed  as  if  the  course 
of  the  world's  history  was  to  be  changed,  as  if  the  older  Celtic 
race  that  Roman  and  German  had  swept  before  them  had  turned 
to  the  moral  conquest  of  their  conquerors,  as  if  Celtic  and  not 
Latin  Christianity  was  to  mould  the  destinies  of  the  churches  of 
the  West. 

On  a  low  island  of  barren  gneiss-rock  off  the  west  coast  of 
Scotland  an  Irish  refugee,  Columba,  had  raised  the  famous  mon- 
astery of  lona.  Oswald  in  youth  found  refuge  within  its  walls, 
and  on  his  accession  to  the  throne  of  Northumbria  he  called  for 
missionaries  from  among  its  monks.  The  first  despatched  in  an- 
swer to  his  call  obtained  little  success.  He  declared  on  his  return 
that  among  a  people  so  stubborn  and  barbarous  success  was 
impossible.  "Was  it  their  stubbornness  or  your  severity?" 
asked  Aidan,  a  brother  sitting  by;  "did  you  forget  God's  word 
to  give  them  the  milk  first  and  then  the  meat?"  All  eyes  turned 
on  the  speaker  as  fittest  to  undertake  the  abandoned  mission, 
and  Aidan  sailing  at  their  bidding,  fixed  his  bishop's  stool  or  see 
in  the  island  peninsula  of  Lindisfarne.  Thence,  from  a  monastery 
which  gave  to  the  spot  its  after  name  of  Holy  Island,  preachers 


Adoption  of  Christianity  19 

poured  forth  over  the  heathen  realms.  Boisil  guided  a  little 
troop  of  missionaries  to  the  valley  of  the  Tweed.  Aidan  himself 
wandered  on  foot  preaching  among  the  peasants  of  Bernicia. 
The  new  religion  served  as  a  prelude  to  the  Northumbrian  advance. 

If  Oswald  was  a  saint,  he  was  none  the  less  resolved  to  build  up 
again  the  realm  of  Eadwine.  Having  extended  his  supremacy 
over  the  Britons  of  Strathclyde  and  won  the  submission  of  the 
Lindiswaras,  he  turned  to  reassert  his  supremacy  over  Wessex. 
The  reception  of  the  new  faith  became  the  mark  of  submission  to 
his  overlordship.  A  preacher,  Birinus,  had  already  penetrated  from 
Gaul  into  Wessex;  in  Oswald's  presence  its  king  received  baptism, 
and  established  with  his  assent  a  see  for  his  people  in  the  royal  city 
of  Dorchester  on  the  Thames.  Oswald  ruled  as  wide  a  realm  as 
his  predecessor;  but  for  after  times  the  memory  of  his  greatness 
was  lost  in  the  legends  of  his  piety.  A  new  conception  of  kingship 
began  to  blend  itself  with  that  of  the  warlike  glory  of  ^thelfrith 
or  the  wise  administration  of  Eadwine.  The  moral  power  which 
was  to  reach  its  height  in  Alfred  first  dawns  in  the  story  of  Os- 
wald. In  his  own  court  the  king  acted  as  interpreter  to  the  Irish 
missionaries  in  their  efforts  to  convert  his  thegns.  "By  reason 
of  his  constant  habit  of  praying  or  giving  thanks  to  the  Lord  he 
was  wont  wherever  he  sat  to  hold  his  hands  upturned  on  his 
knees."  As  he  feasted  with  Bishop  Aidan  by  his  side,  the  thegn, 
or  noble  of  his  war-band,  whom  he  had  set  to  give  alms  to  the 
poor  at  his  gate,  told  him  of  a  multitude  that  still  waited  fasting 
without.  The  king  at  once  bade  the  untasted  meat  before  him 
be  carried  to  the  poor  and  his  silver  dish  be  divided  piecemeal 
among  them.  Aidan  seized  the  royal  hand  and  blessed  it.  "May 
this  hand,"  he  cried,  "  never  grow  old. "... 

The  labors  of  Aidan,  the  victories  of  Oswald  and  Oswiu, 
seemed  to  have  annexed  England  to  the  Irish  Church.  The  monks 
of  Lindisfarne,  or  of  the  new  religious  house  whose  foundation  fol- 
lowed that  of  Lindisfarne,  looked  for  their  ecclesiastical  tradition, 
not  to  Rome  but  to  Ireland;  and  quoted  for  their  guidance  the 
instruction,  not  of  Gregory  but  of  Columba.  Whatever  claims  of 
supremacy  over  the  whole  English  Church  might  be  pressed  by  the 
See  of  Canterbury,  the  real  metropolitan  of  the  Church  as  it  ex- 
isted in  the  north  of  England  was  the  abbot  of  lona.  But  Oswiu's 
queen  brought  with  her  from  Kent  the  loyalty  of  the  Kentish  Church 
to  the  Roman  See,  and  a  Roman  party  at  once  formed  about  her. 
Her  efforts  were  seconded  by  those  of  two  young  thegns  whose 
love  of  Rome  mounted  to  a  passionate  fanaticism. 


2O  English  Historians 

The  life  of  Wilfrid  of  York  was  a  series  of  flights  to  Rome 
and  returns  to  England,  of  wonderful  successes  in  pleading  the 
right  of  Rome  to  the  obedience  of  the  Church  of  Northumbria, 
and  of  as  wonderful  defeats.  Benedict  Biscop  worked  toward  the 
same  end  in  a  quieter  fashion,  coming  backward  and  forward 
across  the  sea  with  books  and  relics  and  cunning  masoas  and 
painters  to  rear  a  great  church  and  monastery  at  Wearmouth, 
whose  brethren  owned  obedience  to  the  Roman  See.  In  652  they 
first  set  out  for  a  visit  to  the  imperial  city ;  and  the  elder  Benedict 
soon  returned  to  preach  ceaselessly  against  the  Irish  usages.  He 
was  followed  by  Wilfrid,  whose  energy  soon  brought  the  quarrel 
to  a  head.  The  strife  between  the  two  parties  rose  so  high  at  last 
that  Oswiu  was  prevailed  upon  to  summon  in  664  a  great  council 
at  Whitby,  where  the  future  ecclesiastical  allegiance  of  England 
should  be  decided. 

The  points  actually  contested  were  trivial  enough.  Colman, 
Aidan's  successor  at  Holy  Island,  pleaded  for  the  Irish  fashion  of 
the  tonsure,  and  for  the  Irish  time  of  keeping  Easter;  Wilfrid 
pleaded  for  the  Roman.  The  one  disputant  appealed  to  the 
authority  of  Columba,  the  other  to  that  of  St.  Peter.  "You  own," 
said  the  king  at  last  to  Colman,  "  that  Christ  gave  to  Peter  the 
keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  —  has  He  given  such  power  to 
Columba?"  The  bishop  could  but  answer  "No."  "Then  will 
I  rather  obey  the  porter  of  Heaven,"  said  Oswiu,  "lest  when  I 
reach  its  gates  he  who  has  the  keys  in  his  keeping  turn  his  back 
on  me,  and  there  be  none  to  open."  The  importance  of  Oswiu's 
judgment  was  never  doubted  at  Lindisfarne,  where  Colman,  fol- 
lowed by  the  whole  of  the  Irish-born  brethren  and  thirty  of  their 
English  fellows,  forsook  the  See  of  Aidan  and  sailed  away  to 
lona. 

Trivial  in  fact  as  were  the  actual  points  of  difference  which 
severed  the  Roman  Church  from  the  Irish,  the  question  to  which 
communion  Northumbria  should  belong  was  of  immense  moment 
to  the  after  fortunes  of  England.  Had  the  Church  of  Aidan  finally 
won,  the  later  ecclesiastical  history  of  England  would  probably 
have  resembled  that  of  Ireland.  Devoid  of  that  power  of  organi- 
zation which  was  the  strength  of  the  Roman  Church,  the  Celtic 
Church  in  its  own  Irish  home  took  the  clan  system  of  the  country 
as  the  basis  of  Church  government.  Tribal  quarrels  and  eccle- 
siastical controversies  became  inextricably  confounded ;  and  the 
clergy,  robbed  of  all  really  spiritual  influence,  contributed  no  ele- 
ment save  that  of  disorder  to  the  state.  Hundreds  of  wandering 


Adoption  of  Christianity  11 

bishops,  as  a  vast  religious  authority  wielded  by  hereditary  chief- 
tains, the  disassociation  of  piety  from  morality,  the  absence  of  those 
larger  and  more  humanizing  influences  which  contact  with  a  wider 
world  alone  can  give:  this  is  the  picture  which  the  Irish  Church 
of  later  times  presents  to  us.  It  was  from  such  a  chaos  as  this  that 
England  was  saved  by  the  victory  of  Rome  in  the  Synod  of  Whitby. 

§  4.    Theodore  and  the  Church  in  England 

The  Church  of  England,  as  we  know  it  to-day,  is  the  work,  so 
far  as  its  outer  form  is  concerned,  of  a  Greek  monk,  Theodore  of 
Tarsus,  whom  Rome,  after  her  victory  at  Whitby,  despatched  in 
668  as  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  to  secure  England  to  her  sway. 
Theodore's  work  was  determined  in  its  main  outlines  by  the  pre- 
vious history  of  the  English  people.  The  conquest  of  the  con- 
tinent had  been  wrought  either  by  races  such  as  the  Goths,  who 
were  already  Christian,  or  by  heathens  like  the  Franks,  who  bowed 
to  the  Christian  faith  of  the  nations  they  conquered.  To  this 
oneness  of  religion  between  the  German  invaders  of  the  Empire 
and  their  Roman  subjects  was  owing  the  preservation  of  all  that 
survived  of  the  Roman  world.  The  Church  everywhere  remained 
untouched.  The  Christian  bishop  became  the  defender  of  the 
conquered  Italian  or  Gaul  against  his  Gothic  and  Lombard  con- 
queror, the  mediator  between  the  German  and  his  subjects,  the 
one  bulwark  against  barbaric  violence  and  oppression.  To  the 
barbarian,  on  the  other  hand,  he  was  the  representative  of  all  that 
was  venerable  in  the  past,  the  living  record  of  law,  of  letters,  and 
of  art.  But  in  Britain  priesthood  and  people  had  been  exter- 
minated together. 

When  Theodore  came  to  organize  the  Church  of  England,  the 
very  memory  of  the  older  Christian  Church  which  existed  in  Ro- 
man Britain  had  passed  away.  The  first  Christian  missionaries, 
strangers  in  a  heathen  land,  attached  themselves  necessarily  to 
the  courts  of  the  kings,  who  were  their  first  converts,  and  whose 
conversion  was  generally  followed  by  that  of  their  people.  The 
English  bishops  were  thus  at  first  royal  chaplains,  and  their 
diocese  was  naturally  nothing  but  the  kingdom.  The  kingdom 
of  Kent  became  the  diocese  of  Canterbury,  and  the  kingdom  of 
Northumbria  the  diocese  of  York.  In  this  way  two  realms  which 
are  all  but  forgotten  are  commemorated  in  the  limits  of  existing 
sees.  That  of  Rochester  represented  till  of  late  an  obscure  king- 
dom of  West  Kent,  and  the  frontier  of  the  original  kingdom  of 


22  English  Historians 

Mercia  might  be  recovered  by  following  the  map  of  the  ancient 
bishopric  of  Lichfield. 

Theodore's  first  work  was  to  order  the  dioceses;  his  second  was 
to  add  many  new  sees  to  the  old  ones,  and  to  group  all  of  them 
around  the  one  centre  of  Canterbury.  All  ties  between  England 
and  the  Irish  Church  were  roughly  broken.  Lindisfarne  sank 
into  obscurity  with  the  flight  of  Colman  and  his  monks.  The 
new  prelates,  gathered  in  synod  after  synod,  acknowledged  the 
authority  of  their  one  primate.  The  organization  of  the  episcopate 
was  followed  during  the  next  hundred  years  by  the  development 
of  the  parish  system.  The  loose  system  of  the  mission-station, 
the  monastery  from  which  priest  and  bishop  went  forth  on  journey 
after  journey  to  preach  and  baptize,  as  Aidan  went  forth  from 
Lindisfarne  or  Cuthbert  from  Melrose,  naturally  disappeared  as 
the  land  became  Christian.  The  missionaries  became  settled 
clergy.  The  holding  of  the  English  noble  or  landowner  became 
the  parish,  and  his  chaplain  the  parish  priest,  as  the  king's  chaplain 
had  become  the  bishop,  and  the  kingdom  his  diocese.  A  source 
of  permanent  endowment  for  the  clergy  was  found  at  a  later  time 
in  the  revival  of  the  Jewish  system  of  tithes,  and  in  the  annual  gift 
to  Church  purposes  of  a  tenth  of  the  produce  of  the  soil;  while 
discipline  within  the  Church  itself  was  provided  for  by  an  elabo- 
rate code  of  sin  and  penance  in  which  the  principle  of  compen- 
sation which  lay  at  the  root  of  the  Teutonic  legislation  crept  into 
the  relations  between  God  and  the  soul. 

In  his  work  of  organization,  in  his  increase  of  bishoprics,  in 
his  arrangement  of  dioceses,  and  the  way  in  which  he  grouped 
them  around  the  See  of  Canterbury,  in  his  national  synods  and 
ecclesiastical  canons,  Theodore  was  unconsciously  doing  a  politi- 
cal >vork.  The  old  divisions  of  kingdoms  and  tribes  about  him, 
divisions  which  had  sprung  for  the  most  part  from  mere  accidents 
of  the  conquest,  were  fast  breaking  down.  The  smaller  states  were 
by  this  time  practically  absorbed  by  the  three  larger  ones,  and  of 
these  three  Mercia  and  Wessex  had  for  a  time  bowed  to  the  over- 
lordship  of  Northumbria.  The  tendency  to  national  unity  which 
was  to  characterize  the  new  England  had  thus  already  declared 
itself;  but  the  policy  of  Theodore  clothed  with  a  sacred  form  and 
surrounded  with  divine  sanctions  a  unity  which  as  yet  rested  on  no 
basis  but  the  sword. 

The  single  throne  of  the  one  primate  at  Canterbury  accustomed 
men's  minds  to  the  thought  of  a  single  throne  for  their  one  tem- 
poral overlord  at  York,  or,  as  in  later  days,  at  Lichfield,  or  at 


Adoption  of  Christianity  23 

Winchester.  The  regular  subordination  of  priest  to  bishop,  of 
bishop  to  primate,  in  the  administration  of  the  Church,  supplied 
a  mould  on  which  the  civil  organization  of  the  State  quietly  shaped 
itself.  Above  all,  the  councils  gathered  by  Theodore  were  the 
first  of  all  national  gatherings  for  general  legislation.  It  was  at  a 
much  later  time  that  the  Wise  Men  of  Wessex,  or  Northumbria, 
or  Mercia,  learned  to  come  together  in  the  Witenagemot  of  all 
England.  It  was  the  ecclesiastical  synods  which  by  their  example 
led  the  way  to  our  national  parliament,  as  it  was  the  canons  en- 
acted in  such  synods  which  led  the  way  to  a  national  system  of 
law.  .  .  . 

§  5.   Bceda,  the  Father  of  English  Learning 

While  the  two  southern  kingdoms  (Mercia  and  Wessex)  were 
wasting  their  energies  in  a  desperate  struggle,  Northumbria  had 
set  aside  its  efforts  at  conquest  for  the  pursuits  of  peace.  Under 
the  reigns  of  Ecgfrith's  successors,  Aldfrith  the  Learned  and  the 
four  kings  who  followed  him,  the  kingdom  became  in  the  middle 
of  the  eighth  century  the  literary  centre  of  Western  Europe.  No 
schools  were  more  famous  than  those  of  Jarrow  and  York.  The 
whole  learning  of  the  age  seemed  to  be  summed  up  in  a  Northum- 
brian scholar.  Baeda  —  the  Venerable  Bede,  as  later  times  styled 
him  —  was  born  in  673,  nine  years  after  the  Synod  of  Whitby,  on 
ground  which  passed  a  year  later  to  Benedict  Biscop  as  the  site 
of  the  great  abbey  which  he  reared  by  the  mouth  of  the  Wear. 
His  youth  was  trained  and  his  long  tranquil  life  was  wholly  spent 
in  an  off-shoot  of  Benedict's  house  which  was  founded  by  his 
friend  Ceolfrid.  Baeda  never  stirred  from  Jarrow.  "I  have 
spent  my  whole  life  in  the  same  monastery,"  he  says,  "and  while 
attentive  to  the  rule  of  my  order  and  the  service  of  the  Church 
my  constant  pleasure  lay  in  learning,  or  teaching,  or  writing." 
The  words  sketch  for  us  a  scholar's  life,  the  more  touching  in  its 
simplicity  that  it  is  the  life  of  the  first  great  English  scholar. 

The  quiet  grandeur  of  a  life  consecrated  to  knowledge,  the  tran- 
quil pleasure  that  lies  in  learning  and  teaching  and  writing, 
dawned  for  Englishmen  in  the  story  of  Baeda.  While  still  young 
he  became  teacher;  and  six  hundred  monks  besides  strangers 
that  flocked  thither  for  instruction  formed  his  school  of  Jarrow. 
It  is  hard  to  imagine  how  among  the  toils  of  the  schoolmaster 
and  the  duties  of  the  monk  Baeda  could  have  found  time  for  the 
composition  of  the  numerous  works  that  made  his  name  famous  in 


24  English   Historians 

the  west.  But  materials  for  study  had  accumulated  in  North- 
umbria  through  the  journeys  of  Wilfrid  and  Benedict  Biscop  and 
the  libraries  which  were  forming  at  Wearmouth  and  York.  The 
tradition  of  the  old  Irish  teachers  still  lingered  to  direct  the  young 
scholar  into  that  path  of  scriptural  interpretation  to  which  he 
chiefly  owed  his  fame.  Greek,  a  rare  accomplishment  in  the  west, 
came  to  him  from  the  school  which  the  Greek  archbishop  Theo- 
dore founded  beneath  the  walls  of  Canterbury.  His  skill  in  the 
ecclesiastical  chant  was  derived  from  a  Roman  cantor  whom 
Pope  Vitalian  sent  in  the  train  of  Benedict  Biscop.  Little  by  little 
the  young  scholar  thus  made  himself  master  of  the  whole  range  of 
the  science  of  his  time;  he  became,  as  Burke  rightly  styled  him, 
"the  father  of  English  learning."  The  tradition  of  the  older 
classic  culture  was  first  revived  for  Engknd  in  his  quotations  of 
Plato  and  Aristotle,  of  Seneca  and  Cicero,  of  Lucretius  and  Ovid. 
Virgil  cast  over  him  the  same  spell  that  he  cast  over  Dante; 
verses  from  the  ^Eneid  break  his  narratives  of  martyrdoms,  and 
the  disciple  ventures  on  the  track  of  the  great  master  in  a  little 
eclogue  descriptive  of  the  approach  of  spring. 

His  work  was  done  with  small  aid  from  others.  "I  am  my 
own  secretary,"  he  writes;  "I  make  my  own  notes.  I  am  my 
own  librarian."  But  forty-five  works  remained  after  his  death  to 
attest  his  prodigious  industry.  In  his  own  eyes  and  those  of  his 
contemporaries  the  most  important  among  these  were  the  commen- 
taries and  homilies  upon  various  books  of  the  Bible  which  he 
had  drawn  from  the  writings  of  the  Fathers.  But  he  was  far  from 
confining  himself  to  theology.  In  treatises  compiled  as  text-books 
for  his  scholarsvBaeda  threw  together  all  that  the  world  had  then 
accumulated  in  astronomy  and  meteorology,  in  physics  and  music, 
in  philosophy,  grammar,  rhetoric,  arithmetic,  medicine.  But  the 
encyclopaedic  character  of  his  researches  left  him  in  heart  a  simple 
Englishman.  He  loved  his  own  English  tongue;  he  was  skilled 
in  English  song;  his  last  work  was  jl  translation  into  English  of 
the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  and  almost  the  last  words  that  broke  from 
his  lips  were  some  English  rimes  upon  death. 

But  the  noblest  proof  of  his  love  of  England  lies  in  the  work 
which  immortalizes  his  name.  In  his  Ecclesiastical  History  of 
the  English  Nation,  Baxla  became  the  first  English  historian. 
All  that  we  really  know  of  the  century  and  a  half  that  follows  the 
landing  of  Augustine  we  know  from  him.  Wherever  his  own  per- 
sonal observation  extended,  the  story  is  told  with  admirable  detail 
and  force.  He  is  hardly  less  full  or  accurate  in  the  portions  which 


Adoption  of  Christianity  25 

he  owed  to  his  Kentish  friends.  Albinus  and  Nothelm.  What  he 
owed  to  no  informant  was  his  own  exquisite  faculty  of  story-telling, 
and  yet  no  story  of  his  own  telling  is  so  touching  as  the  story  of 
his  death.  Two  weeks  before  the  Easter  of  735  the  old  man 
was  seized  with  an  extreme  weakness  and  loss  of  breath.  He  still 
preserved,  however,  his  usual  pleasantness  and  good  humor, 
and  in  spite  of  prolonged  sleeplessness  continued  his  lectures  to 
the  pupils  about  him.  Verses  of  his  own  English  tongue  broke 
from  time  to  time  from  the  master's  lips  — •  rude  rimes  that  told 
how  before  the  "need-fare,"  Death's  stern  "must-go,"  none  can 
enough  bethink  him  what  is  to  be  his  doom  for  good  or  ill.  The 
tears  of  Baeda's  scholars  mingled  with  his  song.  "We  never 
read  without  weeping,"  writes  one  of  them.  So  the  days  rolled 
on  to  Ascension-tide,  and  still  master  and  pupils  toiled  at  their 
work,  for  Baeda  longed  to  bring  to  an  end  his  version  of  St.  John's 
Gospel  into  the  English  tongue,  and  his  extracts  from  Bishop 
Isidore.  "I  don't  want  my  boys  to  read  a  lie,"  he  answered 
those  who  would  have  had  him  rest,  "or  to  work  to  no  purpose 
after  I  am  gone." 

A  few  days  before  Ascension-tide  his  sickness  grew  upon  him, 
but  he  spent  the  whole  day  in  teaching,  only  saying  cheerfully  to 
his  scholars,  "Learn  with  what  speed  you  may;  I  know  not  how 
long  I  may  last."  The  dawn  broke  on  another  sleepless  night 
and  again  the  old  man  called  his  scholars  round  him  and  bade 
them  write.  "There  is  still  a  chapter  wanting,"  said  the  scribe 
as  the  morning  drew  on,  "and  it  is  hard  for  thee  to  question  thyself 
any  longer."  "It  is  easily  done,"  said  Baeda;  " take  thy  pen  and 
write  quickly."  Amid  tears  and  farewells  the  day  wore  away  to 
eventide.  "There  is  yet  one  sentence  unwritten,  dear  master," 
said  the  boy.  "Write  it  quickly,"  bade  the  dying  man.  "It  is 
finished  now,"  said  the  little  scribe  at  last.  "You  speak  truth," 
said  the  master;  "all  is  finished  now."  Placed  upon  the  pave- 
ment, his  head  supported  in  his  scholars'  arms,  his  face  turned 
to  the  spot  where  he  was  wont  to  pray,  Baeda  chanted  the  solemn 
"Glory  to  God."  As  his  voice  reached  the  close  of  his  song  he 
passed  quietly  away.  .  .  . 

§  6.    Mercia  and  the  Supremacy  of  Wessex 

Under  Offa,  whose  reign  from  758  to  796  covers  with  that  of 
^Ethelbald  nearly  the  whole  of  the  eighth  century,  a  middle  king- 
dom, Mercia,  rose  to  a  height  unknown  since  the  days  of  Wulfhere. 


26  English  Historians 

Years,  however,  had  to  pass  before  the  new  king  could  set  about  the 
recovery  of  Kent ;  and  it  was  only  after  a  war  of  three  years  that 
in  775  a  victory  at  Otford  gave  it  back  to  the  Mercian  realm. 
With  Kent  Offa  doubtless  recovered  Sussex  and  Surrey,  as  well 
as  Essex  and  London ;  and  four  years  later  a  victory  at  Bensington 
completed  the  conquest  of  the  district  that  now  forms  the  shires 
of  Oxford  and  Buckingham.  For  the  nine-years  that  followed, 
however,  Mexc.ia  ventured  on  no  further  attempt  to  extend  her 
power  over  her  English  neighbors.  Like  her  rivals,  she  turned 
on  the  Welsh.  Pushing  after  779  over  the  Severn,  whose  upper 
course  had  served  till  now  as  the  frontier  between  Briton  and 
Englishman,  Offa  drove  the  king  of  Powys  from  his  capital, 
which  changed  its  old  name  of  Pengwyrn  for  the  significant  Eng- 
lish title  of  the  town  in  the  scrub  or  bush,  Scrobsbyryg,  or 
Shrewsbury.  The  border-line  he  drew  after  his  inroad  is  marked 
by  a  huge  earthwork  which  runs  from  the  mouth  of  Wye  to  that  of 
Dee,  and  is  still  called  Offa's  Dyke.  A  settlement  of  English- 
men on  the  land  between  this  dyke  and  the  Severn  served  as  a 
military  frontier  for  the  Mercian  realm. 

Here,  as  in  the  later  conquests  of  the  Northumbrians  and  the 
West-Saxons,  the  older  plan  of  driving  off  the  conquered  from  the 
soil  was  definitely  abandoned.  The  Welsh,  who  chose  to  remain, 
dwelt  undisturbed  among  their  English  conquerors;  and  it  was 
probably  to  regulate  the  mutual  relations  of  the  two  races  that 
Offa  drew  up  the  code  of  laws  which  bore  his  name.  In  Mercia 
as  in  Northumbria  attacks  on  the  Britons  marked  the  close  of  all 
dreams  of  supremacy  over  the  English  themselves.  Under  Offa, 
Mercia  sank  into  virtual  isolation.  The  anarchy  into  which 
Northumbria  sank  after  Eadberht's  death  never  tempted  him 
to  cross  the  Humber;  nor  was  he  shaken  from  his  inaction  by 
as  tempting  an  opportunity  which  presented  itself  across  the 
Thames. 

Wessex  in  786  was  torn  by  a  fresh  outbreak  of  anarchy.  The 
strife  between  the  rivals  that  disputed  the  throne  was  ended  by  the 
defeat  of  Ecgberht,  the  heir  of  Ceawlin's  line  and  his  flight  to  Offa's 
court.  The  Mercian  king,  however,  used  his  presence  npt  so  much 
for  schemes  of  aggrandizement  as  to  bring  about  a  peaceful  al- 
liance; and  in  789  Ecgberht  was  driven  from  Mercia,  while  Offa 
wedded  his  daughter  to  the  West-Saxon  king  Beorhtric.  The 
true  aim  of  Offa,  indeed,  was  to  unite  firmly  the  whole  of  Mid- 
Britain,  with  Kent  as  its  outlet  towards  Europe,  under  the  Mercian 
crown,  and  to  mark  its  ecclesiastical  as  well  as  its  political  indepen- 


Adoption  of  Christianity  27 

dence  by  the  formation  in  787  of  an  archbishopric  of  Lichfield 
as  a  check  to  the  See  of  Canterbury  in  the  south,  and  a  rival  to 
the  See  of  York  in  the  north. 

But  while  Offa  was  hampered  in  his  projects  by  the  dread  of  the 
West-Saxons  at  home,  he  was  forced  to  watch  jealously  a  power 
which  had  risen  to  dangerous  greatness  over  sea,  the  power  of 
the  Franks.  Till  now,  the  interests  of  the  English  people  had 
lain  wholly  within  the  bounds  of  the  Britain  they  had  won.  But 
at  this  moment  our  national  horizon  suddenly  widened,  and  the 
fortunes  of  England  became  linked  to  the  general  fortunes  of 
Western  Christendom.  It  was  by  the  work  of  English  missionaries 
that  Britain  was  first  drawn  into  political  relations  with  the  Frank- 
ish  court.  The  Northumbrian  Willibrord,  and  the  more  famous 
West-Saxon  Boniface  or  Winfrith,  followed  in  the  track  of  earlier 
preachers,  both  Irish  and  English,  who  had  been  laboring  among 
the  heathen  of  Germany,  and  especially  among  those  who  had 
now  become  subject  to  the  Franks.  The  Frank  king  Pippin's 
connection  with  the  English  preachers  led  to  constant  intercourse 
with  England;  a  Northumbrian  scholar,  Alcuin,  was  the  centre 
of  the  literary  revival  at  his  court.  Pippin's  son  Charles,  known 
in  after  days  as  Charles  the  Great,  maintained  the  same  interest 
in  English  affairs.  His  friendship  with  Alcuin  drew  him  into 
close  relations  with  Northern  Britain.  Ecgberht,  the  claimant  of 
the  West-Saxon  throne,  had  found  a  refuge  with  him  since  Offa's 
league  with  Beorhtric  in  787.  With  Offa,  too,  his  relations  seem 
to  have  been  generally  friendly. 

But  the  Mercian  king  shrank  cautiously  from  any  connection 
which  might  imply  a  recognition  of  Frankish  supremacy.  He 
had  indeed  good  grounds  for  caution.  The  costly  gifts  sent  by 
Charles  to  the  monasteries  of  England  as  of  Ireland  showed  his 
will  to  obtain  an  influence  in  both  countries;  he  maintained  re- 
lations with  Northumbria,  with  Kent,  with  the  whole  English 
Church.  Above  all,  he  harbored  at  his  court  exiles  from  every 
English  realm,  —  exiled  kings  from  Northumbria,  East  Anglian 
thegns,  fugitives  from  Mercia  itself;  and  Ecgberht  probably 
marched  in  his  train  when  the  shouts  of  the  people  and  priesthood 
of  Rome  hailed  him  as  Roman  Emperor.  When  the  death  of 
Beorhtric  in  802  opened  a  way  for  the  exile's  return  to  Wessex, 
the  relations  of  Charles  with  the  English  were  still  guided  by  the 
dream  that  Britain,  lost  to  the  Empire  at  the  hour  when  the  rest 
of  the  western  provinces  were  lost,  should  return  to  the  Empire 
now  that  Rome  had  risen  again  to  more  than  its  old  greatness 


28  English  Historians 

in  the  west ;  and  the  revolutions  which  were  distracting  the 
English  kingdoms  told  steadily  in  his  favor. 

The  years  since  Ecgberht's  flight  had  made  little  change  in 
the  state  of  Britain.  Offa's  completion  of  his  kingdom  by  the 
seizure  of  East  Anglia  had  been  followed  by  his  death  in  796; 
and  under  his  successor,  Cenwulf,  the  Mercian  archbishopric  was 
suppressed,  and  there  was  no  attempt  to  carry  further  the  suprem- 
acy of  the  Midland  kingdom.  Cenwulf  stood  silently  by  when 
Ecgberht  mounted  the  West-Saxon  throne,  and  maintained  peace 
with  the  new  ruler  of  VVessex  throughout  his  reign.  The  first 
enterprise  of  Ecgberht,  indeed,  was  not  directed  against  his  Eng- 
lish but  his  Welsh  neighbors.  In  815  he  marched  into  the  heart 
of  Cornwall,  and  after  eight  years  of  fighting,  the  last  fragment 
of  British  dominion  in  the  west  came  to  an  end.  As  a  nation, 
Britain  had  passed  away  with  the  victories  of  Deorham  and  Ches- 
ter ;  of  the  separate  British  peoples  who  had  still  carried  on  the 
struggle  with  the  three  English  kingdoms,  the  Britons  of  Cumbria 
and  of  Strathclyde  had  already  bowed  to  Northumbrian  rule; 
the  Britons  of  Wales  had  owned  by  tribute  to  Offa  the  supremacy 
of  Mercia;  the  last  unconquered  British  state  of  West  Wales  as 
far  as  the  Land's  End  now  passed  under  the  mastery  of  Wessex. 

While  Wessex  was  regaining  the  strength  it  had  so  long  lost, 
its  rival  in  Mid-Britain  was  sinking  into  helpless  anarchy.  Within, 
Mercia  was  torn  by  a  civil  war  which  broke  out  on  Cenwulf's 
death  in  821;  and  the  weakness  which  this  left  behind  was 
seen  when  the  old  strife  with  Wessex  was  renewed  by  his  succes- 
sor Beornwulf,  who  in  825  penetrated  into  Wiltshire,  and  was 
defeated  in  a  bloody  battle  at  Ellandun.  All  England  south  of 
the  Thames  at  once  submitted  to  Ecgberht  of  Wessex,  and  East 
Anglia  rose  in  a  desperate  revolt  which  proved  fatal  to  its  Mer- 
cian rulers.  Two  of  its  kings  in  succession  fell  fighting  on  East 
Anglian  soil;  and  a  third,  Wiglaf,  had  hardly  mounted  the 
Mercian  throne  when  his  exhausted  kingdom  was  again  called 
on  to  encounter  the  West-Saxon.  Ecgberht  saw  that  the  hour 
had  come  for  a  decisive  onset.  In  828  his  army  marched  north- 
ward without  a  struggle;  Wiglaf  fled  helplessly  before  it;  and 
Mercia  bowed  to  the  West-Saxon  overlordship.  From  Mercia 
Ecgberht  marched  on  Northumbria;  but  half  a  century  of  an- 
archy had  robbed  that  kingdom  of  all  vigor,  and  pirates  were 
already  harrying  its  coast;  its  nobles  met  him  at  Dore  in  Derby- 
shire, and  owned  him  as  their  overlord.  The  work  that  Oswiu 
and  /Ethelbald  had  failed  to  do  was  done,  and  the  whole  English 


Adoption  of  Christianity  29 

race  in  Britain  was  for  the  first  time  knit  together  under  a  single 
ruler.  Long  and  bitter  as  the  struggle  for  independence  was 
still  to  be  in  Mercia  and  in  the  north,  yet  from  the  moment  that 
Northumbria  bowed  to  its  West-Saxon  overlord,  England  was 
made  in  fact  if  not  as  yet  in  name. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

• 

Hunt,  A  History  of  the  English  Church,   597-1066.     Mason  (editor), 
The  Mission  of  St.  Augustine.     Cutts,  Augustine  of  Canterbury.     Ram- 
say,  Foundations  of  England,  Vol.    I,  chaps,  xi    and    xii.      Hodgkin,    A  t 
Political  History  of  England  to  1066,  chaps,  vii,  xi,  and  xii.    Stubbs,  Consti4 
tutional  History  of  England,  chap,  viii,  especially  for  the  organization   of 
the  Anglo-Saxon   Church.      Gneist,    History  of  the  English  Constitution, 
chap.  v. 


CHAPTER  IV 

ALFRED   THE  GREAT  AND  ENGLISH  LEARNING 

• 

THE  triumph  of  the  West-Saxons  under  Egbert  marked  the 
overlordship  of  a  new  line  of  kings,  rather  than  the  establish- 
ment of  national  unity.  The  work  of  breaking  down  the  strong 
forces  of  independence  which  yet  remained  among  the  conquered 
states  and  of  welding  the  tribal  groups  into  an  English  people 
would  have  required  many  generations  even  if  England  could 
have  had  peace.  But  England  was  not  to  have  peace.  Even 
before  Egbert's  day,  heathen  Northmen  from  Norway  and  Den- 
mark began  to  plunder  the  coasts  of  Europe  and  Britain.  Before 
long,  these  piratical  expeditions  were  transformed  into  systematic 
invasions,  and  in  a  long  contest  with  the  bold  Northmen,  Alfred 
the  Great  was  forced  to  relinquish  a  large  portion  of  his  realm. 
Undaunted  by  his  severe  trials  on  the  battlefield,  however,  Alfred 
devoted  himself  with  great  energy  to  the  development  of  the  arts 
of  civilization  in  the  dominions  that  remained  to  him.  It  is  for 
this  work,  as  well  as  for  his  heroic  defence  of  national  existence, 
that  Alfred  won  an  imperishable  fame  in  English  history. 

§  i.   Danish  Havoc  in  England1 

The  ruin  that  the  Danes  had  wrought  had  been  no  mere  mate- 
rial ruin.  When  they  first  appeared  off  her  shores,  England 
stood  in  the  forefront  of  European  culture;  her  scholars,  her 
libraries,  her  poetry,  had  no  rivals  in  the  Western  world.  But  all, 
or  nearly  all,  of  this  culture  had  disappeared.  The  art  and  learn- 
ing of  Northumbria  had  been  destroyed  at  a  blow ;  and  through- 
out the  rest  of  the  Danelaw  the  ruin  was  as  complete.  The 
very  Christianity  of  Mid-Britain  was  shaken;  the  sees  of  Dun- 
wich  and  Lindsey  came  to  an  end;  at  Lichfield  and  Elmham 

1  Green,  Conquest  of  England,  pp.  148  ff.  By  permission  of  Mrs.  John 
Richard  Green  and  Harper  &  Brothers,  Publishers. 

30 


Alfred  the  Great  and  English   Learning        31 

the  succession  of  bishops  became  broken  and  irregular;  even 
London  hardly  kept  its  bishop's  stool.  But  its  letters  and  civili- 
zation were  more  than  shaken  —  they  had  vanished  in  the  sack 
of  the  great  abbeys  of  the  Fen. 

Even  in  Wessex,  which  ranked  as  the  least  advanced  of  the 
English  kingdoms,  Alfred  could  recall  that  he  saw,  as  a  child, 
"how  the  churches  stood  filled  with  treasures  and  books,  and  there 
was  also  a  great  multitude  of  God's  servants ; "  but  this  was  "before 
it  had  all  been  ravaged  and  burned."  "So  clean  was  learning 
decayed  among  English  folk,"  says  the  king,  "that  very  few  were 
there  on  this  side  Humber  that  could  understand  their  rituals 
in  English,  or  translate  aught  out  of  Latin  into  English,  and  I 
ween  there  were  not  many  beyond  the  Humber.  So  few  of  them 
were  there  that  I  cannot  bethink  me  of  a  single  one  south  of  Thames 
when  I  came  to  the  kingdom."  It  was,  in  fact,  only  in  the  frag- 
ment of  Mercia  which  had  been  saved  from  the  invaders  that  a 
gleam  of  the  old  intellectual  light  lingered  in  the  school  which 
Bishop  Werfrith  had  gathered  round  him  at  Worcester. 

It  is  in  his  efforts  to  repair  this  intellectual  ruin  that  we  see 
Alfred's  conception  of  the  work  he  had  to  do.  The  Danes  had, 
no  doubt,  brought  with  them  much  that  was  to  enrich  the  temper 
of  the  coming  England,  a  larger  and  freer  manhood,  a  greater 
daring,  a  more  passionate  love  of  personal  freedom,  better  sea- 
manship and  a  warmer  love  of  the  sea,  a  keener  spirit  of  traffic, 
and  a  range  of  trade-ventures  which  dragged  English  commerce 
into  a  wider  world.  But  their  work  of  destruction  threatened  to 
rob  England  of  things  even  more  precious  than  these.  In  saving 
Wessex,  ^Elfred  had  saved  the  last  refuge  of  all  that  we  sum  up 
in  the  word  "civilization,"  of  that  sense  of  a  common  citizenship 
and  nationality,  of  the  worth  of  justice  and  order  and  good  govern- 
ment, of  the  harmony  of  individual  freedom  in  its  highest  form 
with  the  general  security  of  society,  of  the  need  for  a  cooperation 
of  every  moral  and  intellectual  force  in  the  development  both  of 
the  individual  man  and  of  the  people  as  a  whole,  which  England 
had  for  two  centuries  been  either  winning  from  its  own  expe- 
riences or  learning  from  the  tradition  of  the  past. 

§  2.   jElfred  Seeks  Learned  Men 

It  was  because  literature  embodied  what  was  worthiest  in  this 
civilization  that  Alfred  turned  to  the  restoration  of  letters.  He 
sought  in  Mercia  for  the  learning  that  Wessex  had  lost.  He  made 


3 2  English  Historians 

the  Mercian  Plegmund  Archbishop  of  Canterbury;  Werfrith, 
Bishop  of  Worcester,  helped  him  in  his  own  literary  efforts,  and 
two  Mercian  priests  —  ^thelstan  and  Werwulf  —  became  his 
chaplains  and  tutors.  But  it  was  by  example  as  well  as  precept 
that  the  king  called  England  again  to  the  studies  it  had  abandoned. 
"  What  of  all  his  troubles  troubled  him  the  most,"  he  used  to 
say,  "was  that,  when  he  had  the  age  and  ability  to  learn,  he  could 
find  no  masters."  But  now  that  masters  could  be  had,  he  worked 
day  and  night.  He  stirred  nowhere  without  having  some  scholar 
by  him.  He  remained  true,  indeed,  to  his  own  tongue  and  his 
own  literature.  His  memory  was  full  of  English  songs,  as  he  had 
caught  them  from  singers'  lips;  and  he  was  not  only  fond  of  re- 
peating them,  but  taught  them  carefully  to  his  children.  But 
he  knew  that  the  actual  knowledge  of  the  world  must  be  sought 
elsewhere.  Before  many  years  were  over  he  had  taught  himself 
Latin,  and  was  soon  skilled  enough  in  it  to  render  Latin  books 
into  the  English  tongue.  His  wide  sympathy  sought  for  aid  in  this 
work  from  other  lands  than  his  own.  "In  old  time,"  the  king  wrote 
sadly,  "  men  came  hither  from  foreign  lands  to  seek  for  instruction ; 
and  now,  if  we  are  to  have  it,  we  can  only  get  it  from  abroad." 
He  sought  it  among  the  West  Franks  and  the  East  Franks;  Grim- 
bald  came  from  St.  Omer  to  preside  over  the  new  abbey  he 
founded  at  Winchester,  while  John,  the  Old  Saxon,  was  fetched  — 
it  may  be  from  the  Westphalian  abbey  of  Corbey  —  to  rule  the 
monastery  he  set  up  at  Athelney. 

§  3.   Asser  in  Royal  Service 

A  Welsh  bishop  was  drawn  with  the  same  end  to  Wessex;  and 
the  account  he  has  left  of  his  visit  and  doings  at  the  court  brings  us 
face  to  face  with  the  king.  "In  those  days,"  says  Bishop  Asser, 
"I  was  called  by  the  king  from  the  western  and  farthest  border  of 
Britain,  and  came  to  Saxon-land;  and  when,  in  a  long  journey, 
I  set  about  approaching  him,  I  arrived,  in  company  with  guides 
of  that  people,  as  far  as  the  region  of  the  Saxons,  who  lie  on  the 
right  hand  of  one's  road,  which  in  the  Saxon  tongue  is  called 
Sussex.  There  for  the  first  time  I  saw  the  king  in  the  king's 
house,  which  is  named  Dene.  And  when  I  had  been  received 
by  him  with  all  kindness,  he  began  to  pray  me  earnestly  to  devote 
myself  to  his  service,  and  be  of  his  household,  and  to  leave  for  his 
sake  all  that  I  possessed  on  the  western  side  of  Severn,  promising 
to  recompense  me  with  greater  possessions." 


Alfred  the  Great  and  English   Learning        33 

Asser,  however,  refused  to  forsake  his  home,  and  Alfred  was 
forced  to  be  content  with  a  promise  of  his  return  six  months  after. 
"And  when  he  seemed  Satisfied  with  this  reply,  I  gave  him  my 
pledge  to  return  in  a  given  time,  and  after  four  days  took  horse 
again  and  set  out  on  my  return  to  my  country.  But  after  I  had 
left  him  and  reached  the  city  of  Winchester,  a  dangerous  fever 
laid  hold  of  me,  and  for  twelve  months  and  a  week  I  lay  with  little 
hope  of  life.  And  when  at  the  set  time  I  did  not  return  to  him 
as  I  had  promised,  he  sent  messengers  to  me  to  hasten  my  riding 
4  to  him,  and  seek  for  the  cause  of  my  delay.  But,  as  I  could  not 
take  horse,  I  sent  another  messenger  back  to  him  to  show  him 
the  cause  of  my  tarrying,  and  to  declare  that  if  I  recovered  from 
my  infirmity  I  would  fulfil  the  promise  I  had  made.  When  my 
sickness  then  had  departed  I  devoted  myself  to  the  king's  service 
on  these  terms,  that  I  should  stay  with  him  for  six  months  in  every 
year,  if  I  could,  or,  if  not,  I  should  stay  three  months  in  Britain  and 
three  months  in  Saxon-land.  So  it  came  about  that  I  made  my 
way  to  him  in  the  king's  house,  which  is  called  Leonaford,  and 
was  greeted  by  him  with  all  honor.  And  that  time  I  stayed  with 
him  in  his  court  through  eight  months,  during  which  I  read  to 
him  whatever  books  he  would  that  we  had  at  hand;  for  it  is  his 
constant  wont,  whatever  be  the  hindrances  either  in  mind  or  body, 
by  day  and  by  night,  either  himself  to  read  books  aloud  or  to  listen 
to  others  reading  them." 

§  4.   Development  of  English  Prose 

The  work,  however,  which  most  told  upon  English  culture  was 
done,  not  by  these  scholars,  but  by  Alfred  himself.  The  king's 
aim  was  simple  and  practical.  He  desired  that  "every  youth 
now  in  England,  that  is  freeborn  and  has  wealth  enough,  be  set 
to  learn,  as  long  as  he  is  not  fit  for  any  other  occupation,  till  they 
well  know  how  to  read  English  writing;  and  let  those  after- 
wards be  taught  in  the  Latin  tongue  who  are  to  continue  learning, 
and  be  promoted  to  a  higher  rank."  For  this  purpose  he  set 
up,  like  Charles  the  Great,  a  school  for  the  young  nobles  at  his 
own  court.  Books  were  needed  for  them  as  well  as  for  the-priests, 
to  the  bulk  of  whom  Latin  was  a  strange  tongue,  and  the  king 
set  himself  to  provide  English  books  for  these  readers.  It  was  in 
carrying  out  this  simple  purpose  that  Alfred  changed  the  whole 
front  of  English  literature.  In  the  paraphrase  of  Cadmon,  in 
the  epic  of  Beowulf,  in  the  verses  of  Northumbrian  singers,  in 


34  English  Historians 

battle-songs  and  ballads,  English  poetry  had  already  risen  to  a 
grand  and  vigorous  life. 

But  English  prose  hardly  existed.  "Since  Theodore's  time, 
theology  had  been  the  favorite  study  of  English  scholars,  and  the- 
ology naturally  took  a  Latin  shape.  Historical  literature  followed 
Baeda's  lead  in  finding  a  Latin  vehicle  of  expression.  Saints' 
lives,  which  had  now  become  numerous,  were  as  yet  always 
written  in  Latin.  It  was  from  .Alfred's  day  that  this  tide  of  literary 
fashion  suddenly  turned.  English  prose  started  vigorously  into 
life.  Theology  stooped  to  an  English  dress.  History  became 
almost  wholly  vernacular.  The  translation .  of  Latin  saint-lives 
into  English  became  one  of  the  most  popular  literary  trades  of  the 
day.  Even  medicine  found  English  interpreters.  A  national 
literature,  in  fact,  sprang  suddenly  into  existence  which  was  with- 
out parallel  in  the  Western  world. 

It  is  thus  that  in  the  literatures  of  modern  Europe  that  of  Eng- 
land leads  the  way.  The  Romance  tongues  —  the  tongues  of 
Italy,  Gaul,  and  Spain  —  were  only  just  emerging  into  definite 
existence  when  Alfred  wrote.  Ulfilas,  the  first  Teutonic  prose- 
writer,  found  no  successors  among  his  Gothic  people;  and  none 
of  the  German  folk  across  the  sea  were  to  possess  a  prose  literature 
of  their  own  for  centuries  to  come.  English,  therefore,  was  not 
only  the  first  Teutonic  literature  —  it  was  the  earliest  prose  litera- 
ture of  the  modern  world.  And  at  the  outset  of  English  literature 
stands  the  figure  of  Alfred.  The  mighty  roll  of  books  that  fills 
our  libraries  opens  with  the  translations  of  the  king. 

He  took  his  books  as  he  found  them  —  they  were,  in  fact,  the 
popular  manuals  of  his  day :  the  compilation  of  Orosius,  which 
was  then  the  one  accessible  hand-book  of  universal  history,  the 
works  of  Baeda,  the  Consolation  of  Bcetlmis,  the  Pastoral  Book 
of  Pope  Gregory.  "I  wondered  greatly,"  he  says,  "that  of  those 
good  men  who  were  aforetime  all  over  England,  and  who  had 
learned  perfectly  these  books,  none  would  translate  any  part  into 
their  own  language.  But  I  soon  answered  myself,  and  said, 
'They  never  thought  that  men  would  be  so  reckless  and  learning 
so  fallen.'  " 

As  it  was,  however,  the  books  had  to  be  rendered  into  English 
by  the  king  himself,  with  the  help  of  the  scholars  he  had  gathered 
round  him.  "When  I  remembered,"  he  says,  in  his  preface  to 
the  Pastoral  Book,  "how  the  knowledge  of  Latin  had  formerly 
decayed  throughout  England,  and  yet  many  could  read  English 
writing,  I  began,  among  other  various  and  manifold  troubles  of 


Alfred  the  Great  and  English  Learning        35 

this  kingdom,  to  translate  into  English  the  book  which  is  called 
in  Latin  Pastoralis,  and  in  English  Shepherd's  Book,  some- 
times word  by  word,  and  sometimes  according  to  the  sense,  as 
I  had  learned  it  from  Plegmund,  my  archbishop,  and  Asser,  my 
bishop,  and  Grimbald,  my  mass-priest,  and  John,  my  mass-priest. 
And  when  I  had  learned  it  as  I  could  best  understand  it,  and  as 
I  could  most  clearly  interpret  it,  I  translated  it  into  English." 

^Elfred  was  too  wise  a  man  not  to  own  the  worth  of  such  trans- 
lations in  themselves.  The  Bible,  he  urged,  with  his  cool  common- 
sense,  had  told  on  the  nations  through  versions  in  their  own  tongues. 
The  Greeks  knew  it  in  Greek.  The  Romans  knew  it  in  Latin. 
Englishmen  might  know  it,  as  they  might  know  the  other  great 
books  of  the  world,  in  their  own  English.  "I  think  it  better, 
therefore,  to  render  some  books  that  are  most  needful  for  men 
to  know  into  the  language  that  we  may  all  understand." 

But  Alfred  showed  himself  more  than  a  translator.  He  be- 
came an  editor  for  his  people.  Here  he  omitted,  there  he  expanded. 
He  enriched  his  first  translation,  the  Orosius,  by  a  sketch  of 
new  geographical  discoveries  in  the  north.  He  gave  a  West- 
Saxon  form  to  his  selections  from  Basda.  In  one  place  he  stops 
to  explain  his  theory  of  government,  his  wish  for  a  thicker  popu- 
lation, his  conception  of  national  welfare  as  consisting  in  a  due 
balance  of  the  priest,  the  thegn,  and  the  churl.  The  mention 
of  Nero  spurs  him  to  an  outbreak  against  abuses  of  power.  The 
cold  acknowledgment  of  a  Providence  by  Bcethius  gives  way  to 
an  enthusiastic  acknowledgment  of  the  goodness  of  God.  As 
Alfred  writes,  his  large-hearted  nature  flings  off  its  royal  mantle, 
and  he  talks  as  a  man  to  men.  "Do  not  blame  me,"  he  prays, 
with  a  charming  simplicity,  "if  any  know  Latin  better  than  I, 
for  every  man  must  say  what  he  says  and  do  what  he  does  accord- 
ing to  his  ability." 

§  5.    The  Old  English  Chronicle 

Among  his  earliest  undertakings  was  an  English  version  of 
Baeda's  history;  and  it  was  probably  the  making  of  this  version 
which  suggested  the  thought  of  a  work  which  was  to  be  memorable 
in  our  literature.  Winchester,  like  most  other  Episcopal  mon- 
asteries, seems  to  have  had  its  own  Bishop's  Roll,  a  series  of 
meagre  and  irregular  annals  in  the  Latin  tongue,  for  the  most 
part  mere  jottings  of  the  dates  when  West-Saxon  bishop  and  West- 
Saxon  king  mounted  throne  and  bishop-stool.  The  story  of  this 


36  English  Historians 

Roll  and  its  aftergrowth  has  been  ingeniously  traced  by  modern 
criticism,  and  the  general  conclusions  at  which  it  has  arrived  seem 
probable  enough.  The  entries  of  the  Roll  were  posted  up  at  un- 
certain intervals  and  with  more  or  less  accuracy  from  the  days 
of  the  first  West-Saxon  bishop,  Birinus.  Meagre  as  they  were, 
these  earlier  annals  were  historical  in  character  and  free  from 
any  mythical  intermixture;  but  save  for  a  brief  space  in  Ine's 
day  they  were  purely  West-Saxon,  and  with  the  troubles  which 
followed  Ine's  death  they  came  to  an  end  altogether. 

It  was  not  until  the  revival  of  West-Saxon  energy  under  Ecgberht 
that  any  effort  was  made  to  take  up  the  record  again  and  to  fill 
up  the  gap  that  its  closing  had  made.  But  Swithun  was  probably 
the  first  to  begin  the  series  of  developments  which  transformed 
this  Bishop's  Roll  into  a  national  history;  and  the  clerk  to  whom 
he  intrusted  its  compilation  continued  the  Roll  by  a  series  of 
military  and  political  entries  to  which  we  owe  our  knowledge  of 
the  reign  of  ^thelwulf,  while  he  enlarged  and  revised  the  work 
throughout,  prefixing  to  its  opening  those  broken  traditions  of 
the  coming  of  our  fathers  which,  touched  as  they  are  here  and 
there  by  mythical  intermixture,  remain  the  one  priceless  record 
of  the  conquest  of  Britain. 

It  was  this  Latin  chronicle  of  Swithun's  clerk  that  Alfred  seems 
to  have  taken  in  hand  about  88^,  and  whose  whole  character  he 
changed  by  giving  it  an  English  Yorm.  In  its  earlier  portions  he 
carried  still  further  the  process  of  expansion.  An  introduction 
dating  from  the  birth  of  Christ,  drawn  from  the  work  of  Baeda, 
was  added  to  its  opening,  and  entries  from  the  same  source  were 
worked  into  the  after-annals.  But  it  was  where  Swithun's  work 
ended  that  Alfred's  own  work  really  began,  for  it  is  from  the  death 
of  ^)thelwulf  that  the  Roll  widens  into  a  continuous  narrative  — 
a  narrative  full  of  life  and  originality,  whose  vigor  and  freshness 
mark  the  gift  of  a  new  power  to  the  English  tongue. 

The  appearance  of  such  a  work  in  their  own  mother-speech 
could  not  fail  to  produce  a  deep  impression  on  the  people  whose 
story  it  told.  With  it  English  history  became  the  heritage  of  the 
English  people.  Baeda  had  left  it  accessible  merely  to  noble  or 
priest;  Alfred  was  the  first  to  give  it  to  the  people  at  large.  Nor 
was  this  all.  The  tiny  streams  of  historic  record,  which  had  been 
dispersed  over  the  cbuntry  at  large,  were  from  this  time  drawn 
into  a  single  channel.  The  Chronicle  —  for  from  this  time  we 
may  use  the  term  by  which  the  work  has  become  famous  — 
served  even  more  than  the  presence  of  the  Dane  to  put  an  end  to 


Alfred  the  Great  and  English   Learning        37 

the  existence  of  distinct  annals  in  Northumbria  and  Mercia,  and  to 
help  on  the  progress  of  national  unity  by  reflecting  everywhere 
the  same  national  consciousness. 

When  his  work  on  Baeda  was  finished,  Alfred,  it  is  thought, 
began  his  translation  of  the  Consolation  of  Bcethius;  and  it  is 
not  improbable  that  the  metrical  translation  of  the  Metra  of 
Boethius  was  also  from  his  hand.  From  philosophy  and  this 
effort  at  poetry  he  turned  to  give  to  his  people  a  book  on  practical 
theology.  As  far  as  we  know,  the  translation  of  the  Pastoral  Rule 
of  Pope  Gregory  was  his  last  work,  and  of  all  his  translations  it 
was  the  most  carefully  done.  It  is  only  as  we  follow  the  king  in 
the  manifold  activity  of  his  life  that  we  understand  his  almost 
passionate  desire  for  that  "stillness"  which  was  essential  to  his 
work.  But  it  was  only  by  short  spaces  that  the  land  was  "still," 
and  once  more  Alfred's  work  of  peace  was  to  be  broken  off  by 
a  renewal  of  the  old  struggle . 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Plummer,  Life  and  Times  of  Alfred  the  Great.  Pauli,  Life  of  King 
Alfred,  an  old  but  still  useful  work.  Conybeare,  Alfred  in  the  Chroniclers, 
especially  valuable  for  the  source  material  collected.  Stevenson,  Asser's 
Life  of  King  Alfred,  a  critical  edition  of  this  famous  work.  Bowker  (editor), 
Alfred  the  Great  (1899).  Ramsay,  Foundations  of  England,  Vol.  I,  chap,  xv, 
a  dry  but  reliable  account.  Hodgkin,  A  Political  History  of  England  to 
1066,  chap.  xvii. 


45273 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  REIGN  OF  CNUT 

THOUGH  Alfred's  successors  wrested  from  the  Danes  the  English 
territory  which  had  been  lost,  they  were  not  able  to  establish  a 
stable  and  permanent  government  strong  enough  to  resist  all 
attacks  on  national  independence.  Toward  the  close  of  the  tenth 
century  the  Danes  began  to  harry  and  invade  the  land  in  their 
old  fashion.  For  a  time  they  were  bought  off  with  heavy  grants 
of  money,  but  they  were  bent  on  conquest.  In  1016  Edmund 
Ironside,  badly  supported  by  his  own  followers,  was  forced  to 
share  his  kingdom  with  the  Danish  leader  Cnut,  and,  as  the 
English  king  died  in  the  same  year,  the  latter  was  able  to  make 
himself  master  of  the  country. 

§  i.  Accession  of  Cnut  and  Settle ment  of  his  Kingdom  l 

Immediately  after  the  death  of  Eadmund,  his  powerful  vassal, 
Cnut,  summoned  the  bishops,  ealdormen,  thanes,  and  all  the  chief 
men  of  England  to  a  great  assembly  at  London.  On  their  ap- 
pearance before  him,  as  if  distrustful  of  his  own  memory,  he 
desired  those  who  were  witnesses  of  what  had  passed  between 
him  and  Eadmund,  when  they  agreed  to  divide  the  kingdom,  to 
declare  what  had  been  said  regarding  the  brothers  and  sons  of  the 
latter;  whether  in  the  case  of  his  surviving  Eadmund,  the  throne 
should  devolve  on  him  or  on  them.  The  base  and  selfish  cour- 
tiers immediately  declared  on  oath  that  Eadmund,  neither  in 
his  lifetime  nor  when  at  the  point  of  death,  had  ever  designed 
any  portion  of  his  kingdom  for  his  brothers;  but  that  Cnut,  ac- 
cording to  the  known  will  of  Eadmund,  should  aid  and  support 
his  children  until  they  were  of  age  to  assume  the  reins  of  govern- 
ment. 

1  Lappenberg,  A  History  oj  England  under  iht  Anglo-Saxon  Kings, 
Vol.  II,  pp.  196  ff. 


The  Reign  of  Cnut  39 

This  declaration  of  the  exclusion  of  the  brothers  was,  at  a  time 
when  the  pretensions  of  minors  to  the  throne  were  seldom  re- 
garded, all  that  Cnut  required  in  order  to  be  acknowledged  king 
of  all  England.  With  few  exceptions,  the  persons  assembled 
swore  to  choose  him  for  their  king,  humbly  to  obey  him,  and  to 
pay  tribute  to  his  army;  and,  having  received  his  pledge  given 
with  his  naked  hand,  and  the  oaths  of  the  Danish  chiefs,  they 
treated  with  contempt  the  brothers  and  sons  of  Eadmund  and 
declared  them  unworthy  ever  to  ascend  the  throne.  Of  these 
the  clito  Eadwig,  the  highly  revered  brother  of  Eadmund,  was 
pronounced  worthy  of  banishment;  but  Cnut,  who  naturally 
feared  him  as  a  rival  above  all  his  brothers,  lost  no  time  in  delib- 
erating with  Eadric  as  to  the  readiest  means  of  destroying  him. 
Eadric  hereupon  introduced  to  Cnut,  as  a  fitting  instrument, 
a  certain  nobleman  named  ^Ethelweard,  to  whom  a  great  reward 
was  offered  for  the  head  of  the  prince,  but  who,  while  expressing 
his  readiness,  had  no  intention  to  perpetrate  the  deed.  The  prince, 
therefore,  for  that  time,  escaped  with  life. 

After  a  short  interval,  in  the  beginning  of  the  following  year, 
the  election  of  Cnut  took  place  at  London,  to  which  the  vassals 
from  the  remotest  parts  were  summoned.  Having  entered  into 
the  customary  engagements  with  the  nobles  and  people,  and 
exchanged  oaths  of  lasting  friendship  and  oblivion  of  all  former 
enmities,  he  ordained  a  new  division  of  the  kingdom.  From  the 
few  ealdormen,  whose  names  have  been  transmitted  to  us,  it  would 
seem  that,  even  in  the  last  years  of  /Ethelred,  the  division  of  the 
country  into  a  number  of  small  provinces  had  been  thought  dis- 
advantageous; but  Cnut  went  further  in  the  work  of  reform 
by  dividing  England  into  four  parts  only.  Of  these  he  reserved 
Wessex  for  his  own  immediate  government,  Eadric  retained 
Mercia,  East  Anglia  was  assigned  to  Thorkell,  who  had  espoused 
Eadgyth,  the  widow  of  the  ealdorman  Ulfcytel;  Northumbria 
was  bestowed  on  Eric,  the  former  jarl  of  Norway. 

§  2.    Cnut  and  his  Rivals 

A  series  of  measures  was  next  adopted  for  the  security  of  Cnut 
against  the  members  of  the  legitimate  royal  family.  The  aethel- 
ing  Eadwig,  against  whom  a  decree  of  banishment  had  already 
been  pronounced  by  the  Witan  at  London,  was  declared  an  out- 
law, as  well  as  another  Eadwig,  probably  a  relation  of  the  royal 
house,  who,  for  reasons  with  which  we  are  unacquainted,  was 


40  English  Historians 

called  the  "king  of  the  churls  or  peasants."  The  two  sons  of 
Eadmund,  Eadward  and  Eadmund,  the  eldest  scarcely  two 
years  old,  were  sent  by  Cnut  to  his  half-brother  Olaf,  king  of 
Sweden,  who,  it  seems,  would  neither  take  charge  of  guests  who 
might  one  day  involve  him  in  difficulties,  nor,  yielding  to  the  wishes 
and,  as  it  is  said,  secret  requests  of  Cnut,  cause  them  to  be  mur- 
dered. The  children  were,  therefore,  sent  to  Stephen,  king  of 
Hungary,  the  brother-in-law,  by  his  wife  Gisela,  of  the  German 
king  and  emperor,  Henry  the  Second,  who,  as  well  as  Stephen, 
was  distinguished  by  the  title  of  "Saint." 

Cnut  had  now  removed  his  most  dangerous  enemies  from  Eng- 
land. Olaf  of  Norway  (if  the  poetic  sagas  of  Snorre  have  any 
historic  foundations),  who,  after  the  death  of  Eadmund,  afforded 
succor  to  his  brothers,  had  been  beaten  back,  and  over  the  rest 
of  the  north  the  power  of  Cnut  was  supreme,  either  directly 
or  through  his  relations.  The  chief  danger  threatened  him  from 
Normandy,  where  ^Ifgifu-Emma,  the  widow  of  ^thelred,  and 
her  two  sons  were  residing  with  her  brother  Richard  the  Second, 
surnamed  the  Good.  After  so  many  deeds  of  violence,  the  pol- 
icy of  the  Northern  conqueror  excites  our  astonishment,  which 
prompted  him  to  offer  his  hand  to  the  widow  of  the  Anglo-Saxon 
king,  and,  without  consideration  for  his  and  her  elder  children, 
to  promise  the  succession  to  those  they  might  have  in  common. 
By  the  end  of  July  this  marriage  was  completed,  one  consequence 
of  which  seems  to  have  been,  besides  a  closer  alliance  with  Duke 
Richard,  the  adoption  of  some  milder  measures,  as  we  find  that 
Eadwig,  "the  king  of  the  churls,"  made  his  peace  with  the  king 

But  Cnut  could  not  consider  himself  secure  while  surrounded 
by  so  many  powerful  Anglo-Saxons,  and  in  the  same  year  he 
caused  Eadwig  the  aetheling  to  be  murdered.  Eadric  of  Mercia 
also,  who  had  so  greatly  facilitated  his  attainment  to  the  throne 
of  England,  but  was  an  object  of  hatred  both  to  the  Danes 
and  Saxons,  met  with  the  fate  he  so  richly  merited.  During 
the  Christmas  festival  an  altercation  arose  between  Cnut  and 
Eadric,  when  the  latter,  with  the  view  apparently  of  obtaining 
some  further  rewards,  exclaimed,  "It  was  for  you  that  I  deserted 
Eadmund,  and  from  fidelity  to  you  I  afterwards  destroyed  him." 
"Then  you  deserve  death,"  answered  the  irritated  monarch,  "for 
treason  against  God  and  against  me;  for  having  slain  your  rightful 
sovereign  and  my  sworn  brother."  Hereupon  he  summoned  to  his 
presence  the  jarl  Eric,  who  was  at  hand,  and  who,  on  a  word  from 
his  master,  raised  his  battle-axe  and  felled  the  traitor  to  the  earth. 


The  Reign  of  Cnut  41 

His  body  being  cast  over  the  city  wall,  was  there  left  unburied. 
At  the  same  time,  on  mere  suspicion,  he  caused  to  be  slain  North- 
man, the  son  of  Leofwine  the  ealdorman,oneof  the  chief  of  Eadric's 
adherents;  ^Ethelweard,  the  son  of  ^thelmaer  the  Great,  and 
Brihtric,  the  son  of  ^Elfheah.  Northman's  possessions  were 
inherited  by  his  brother  Leofric,  who  long  enjoyed  the  favor  of 
Cnut.  One  motive  for  the  destruction  of  so  many  Anglo-Saxons 
may  have  been  the  necessity  of  rewarding  the  Danish  warriors 
with  lands,  and  thereby  fixing  them  in  England.  On  the  other 
hand,  all  those  Anglo-Saxons  who,  by  treason  or  weakness,  had 
contributed  to  the  overthrow  of  the  old  dynasty,  were  with  great 
rigor  banished  by  Cnut  from  his  presence,  and  even  from  the 
kingdom,  as  useless  and  dangerous.  A  heavy  Danegeld  of  seventy- 
two  thousand  pounds  which  was  imposed  on  the  English,  besides 
ten  thousand  five  hundred  pounds,  to  be  paid  by  the  citizens 
of  London  alone,  closed  the  hostile  measures  of  the  new  sovereign 
against  England,  where  during  the  whole  remaining  part  of  his 
reign  we  meet  only  with  one  trace  of  disturbance  caused  by  the 
natives.  After  the  above-mentioned  oppressive  tax  was  paid, 
Cnut  sent  his  fleet  of  about  fifty  ships  back  to  Denmark. 

§  3.   Cnut  as  Ruler 

A  remarkable  change  in  the  government  of  Cnut  is  at  this  time 
observable:  we  perceive  him,  if  not  a  ruler  to  be  compared  with 
Charles  the  Great,  yet  a  conqueror  who  wag  not  hated,  and  under 
wnom  the  people  were  probably  happier  than  they  had  latterly 
been  under  their  native  sovereigns.  The  stern  warrior  appears 
from  this  time  as  a  provident  and  wise  ruler,  capable  of  valuing 
and  promoting  and  profiting  by  all  the  blessings  of  peace.  The 
legal  state  of  the  country  was  settled  in  a  great  witenagemot  at 
Oxford,  and  the  legislation  as  it  had  been  in. the  days  of  King 
Eadgar  adopted  as  the  model.  The  laws  of  Eadgar  had  shown 
particular  regard  to  the  Danes  dwelling  in  England,  while  in 
those  of  ^thelred,  as  far  as  we  are  acquainted  with  them,  similar 
provisions  do  not  appear;  they  may  even  have  contained  enact- 
ments by  which  the  customary  laws  of  that  nation  were  infringed. 
Cnut,  moreover,  devoted  the  greatest  attention  to  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  laws,  and  in  pursuance  of  this  object  frequently  jour- 
neyed through  his  English  states  from  one  boundary  to  another, 
attended  by  his  counsellors  and  scribes.  As  a  result  of  these 
Judicial  labors  may  be  regarded  the  numerous  laws  enacted 


42  English  Historians 

by  Cnut  for  the  Anglo-Saxons,  both  ecclesiastical  and  secular, 
among  the  latter  of  which  have  been  reckoned  a  collection  of  pro- 
visions relative  to  the  royal  forests  and  the  chase.  In  these  it 
is  particularly  striking  with  what  care  their  distinctive  rights  are 
preserved  to  the  Anglo-Saxons  and  their  several  provinces,  as 
well  as  to  the  Danes,  to  whom  no  legal  favor  appears  to  have  been 
shown,  and  how  everything  seems  to  have  been  done  to  satisfy 
the  pretensions  of  the  clergy.  In  which  year  of  Cnut's  reign 
these  laws  were  published  at  Winchester  is,  according  to  the  cus- 
tom of  that  age,  not  specified,  and  few,  if  any,  attempts  have  since 
been  made  to  ascertain  it.  They  do  not,  however,  appear  to 
have  been  composed  in  the  first  years  of  his  reign,  and  are,  there- 
fore, not  to  be  confounded  with  the  before-mentioned  confirma- 
tion of  Eadgar's  laws,  as  may  be  inferred  from  their  preamble, 
which  shows  them  to  be  posterior  to  the  reconquest  of  Norway 
in  1028,  as  well  as  from  the  reintroduction  of  St.  Peter's  penny. 

§  4.   Cnut  and  his  Military  System 

With  greater  probability  may  be  reckoned  among  the  earlier 
labors  of  Cnut  the  composition  of  the  Witherlags  Ret,  a 
court-  or  gild-law,  framed  for  his  standing  army,  as  well  as  for 
the  body-guards  of  his  jarls.  As  the  greater  part  of  his  army 
remained  in  England,  the  Witherlags  Ret  was  there  first  estab- 
lished, and  as  the  introduction  of  strict  discipline  among  such  a 
military  community  must  precede  all  other  ameliorations  in  the 
condition  of  the  country,  the  mention  of  this  law  in  its  history 
ought  not  to  be  omitted.  The  immediate  military  attendants  of 
a  conqueror  always  exercise  vast  influence,  and  these  originally 
Danish  soldiers  have  at  a  later  period,  both  as  body-guards  of 
the  king  and  of  the  greater  vassals,  acted  no  unimportant  part 
in  the  country.  They  were  armed  with  axes,  halberds,  and  swords 
inlaid  with  gold,  and  in  purpose,  descent,  and  equipment  corre- 
sponded to  the  Warangian  guard,  in  which  the  throne  of  the 
Byzantine  emperors  found  its  best  security.  In  Cnut's  time 
the  number  of  these  mercenaries  was  not  very  great,  —  being  by 
some  reckoned  at  three  thousand,  by  others  at  six  thousand,  — 
but  they  were  gathered  under  his  banner  from  various  nations, 
and  consequently  required  the  stricter  discipline.  Even  a  valiant 
Wendish  prince,  Gottschalk,  the  son  of  Udo,  stayed  long  with 
Cnut  in  England,  and  gained  the  hand  of  a  daughter  of  the  royal 
house.  Cnut  himself  appears  rather  as  a  sort  of  grand-master 


The  Reign  of  Cnut  43 

of  this  military  gild  than  as  its  commander,  and  it  is  said  that, 
having  in  his  anger  slain  one  of  the  brotherhood  in  England,  he 
submitted  himself  to  its  judgment  in  their  assembly  and  paid 
a  ninefold  compensation.  The  degrading  epithet  of  nithing,  ap- 
plied to  an  expelled  member  of  the  gild,  is  an  Anglo-Saxon  word, 
which  at  a  later  period  occurs  in  a  way  to  render  it  extremely 
probable  that  the  gild-law  of  the  royal  house-carls  was  in  exist- 
ence after  the  Norman  Conquest. 

§  5.   Cnut  and  the  Church 

With  the  same  prudence  and  the  same  success  with  which 
Cnut  provided  for  the  interests  of  the  other  classes,  he  protected 
also  those  of  the  clergy.  Heathenism,  which  had  held  possession 
of  many  a  lurking  place  in  the  popular  belief  of  the  Anglo-Saxons, 
and  had  again  found  entrance  with  the  newly  settled  Danes,  was 
strictly  prohibited.  Ecclesiastics  were  honored  by  him,  many 
churches  rebuilt,  every  monastery  in  England  richly  gifted,  and 
some  also  in  foreign  countries,  among  which  those  of  St.  Omer's 
and  Chartres  were  gladly  surprised  by  costly  presents;  by  simi- 
lar ones  the  chapter  at  Bremen  was  induced  to  pray  for  him 
under  the  Christian  name  of  Lambert,  for  Queen  Emma  and  for 
his  son,  Harthacnut;  Cologne  also  received  from  him  splendid 
psalters  and  choral  books.  He  instituted  the  anniversaries  of 
the  sainted  King  Eadward  and  of  St.  Dunstan,  and  the  remains 
of  Archbishop  ^Elfheah,  who  had  been  so  barbarously  murdered 
by  his  countrymen,  he  caused  to  be  conveyed  with  the  greatest 
pomp  to  Canterbury.  In  honor  of  St.  Eadmund,  the  king  and 
martyr,  he  caused  the  Benedictine  monastery  to  be  founded,  or 
rather  refounded  at  Bedericsworth,  since  called  St.  Edmundsbury, 
an  undertaking  through  which,  as  well  as  by  many  of  the  measures 
above  related,  he  might  feel  sure  of  gaining  the  good  will  of  the 
Anglo-Saxons.  The  reestablishment  of  St.  Peter's  penny  was 
a  step  which  greatly  raised  him  in  the  estimation  of  the  higher 
clergy,  and  without  injuring  him  in  the  eyes  of  the  people,  who 
no  longer  regarded  as  a  foreign  foe  a  king  who  from  choice  lived 
in  the  midst  of  them,  protected  their  rights,  honored  their  saints, 
and  cultivated  their  language.  Even  Danish  bishoprics  he  con- 
ferred on  English  ecclesiastics,  among  which  may  be  named 
Scania  on  Bernhard,  Fionia  on  Reinhere,  Seeland  or  Roskilde 
on  Gerbrand:  a  proceeding  the  less  extraordinary,  as  St.  Olaf, 
king  of  Norway,  and  Olaf  of  Sweden  had  also  invited  from 


44  English  Historians 

England  many  excellent  priests  for  the  conversion  of  their  sub- 
jects, as  Sigefrith,  Sigeward,  and  his  brother's  son  Grimkil, 
Rodulf,  Bernhard,  and  Wulfrith.  .  .  . 

§  6.    Cnul's  Journey  to  Rome  and  Letter  to  his  People 

After  some  ten  years'  work  in  making  sure  his  dominion,  a 
period  of  tranquillity  arrived  in  which  Cnut  was  enabled  to  exe- 
cute without  apprehension  the  wish  which  he  had  long  cherished 
and  often  postponed,  of  making  a  pilgrimage  to  Rome.  In  the 
latter  half  of  the  year  1026  he  left  Denmark,  whence  he  appears 
to  have  proceeded  to  Flanders,  where,  at  St.  Omer's,  he  was  seen, 
and  his  penitence  admired  by  the  encomiast  of  Queen  Emma. 
We  also  meet  with  him  at  Namur,  where  he  trusted  himself  to 
Count  Albert  only  against  hostages,  but  with  whom  he  after- 
wards entered  on  terms  of  friendship.  During  his  whole  progress 
he  gave  noble  proofs  of  his  munificence.  Hence,  passing  through 
France  and  Burgundy,  he  reached  the  holy  city  where,  besides 
other  immunities,  he  obtained  from  Pope  John  the  Nineteenth 
the  exemption  of  the  Saxon  or  English  school  from  all  taxes 
and  tolls.  After  having  visited  all  the  chapels  and  churches  in 
Middle  Italy,  he  passed  his  Easter  at  Rome,  in  order  to  be  present 
at  the  coronation  of  his  friend  and  ally  the  Emperor  Conrad  the 
Second.  It  is  probable  that  the  marriage  of  their  respective 
children  was  here  settled.  Of  the  other  benefits  acquired  for 
his  people  by  this  journey  an  ample  account  is  given  in  the  fol- 
lowing letter,  which  he  sent  to  England,  while  on  his  return  to 
Denmark,  by  the  hands  of  Living,  abbot  of  Tavistock,  and  after- 
wards bishop  of  Crediton,  and  which  we  give  entire  as  a  picture 
of  the  age,  and,  perhaps,  as  a  proof  of  an  amended  life  as  well 
as  regal  munificence. 

"Cnut,  king  of  all  England  and  Denmark,  and  of  part  of 
Sweden,  to  ^Ethelnoth  the  metropolitan,  and  JEtiric  of  York, 
and  to  all  bishops  and  primates,  and  to  the  whole  nation  of  the 
English,  both  noble  and  ignoble,  wishes  health.  I  make  known 
to  you  that  I  have  lately  been  to  Rome,  to  pray  for  the  redemption 
of  my  sins,  and  for  the  prosperity  of  the  kingdoms  and  peoples 
subject  to  my  rule.  This  journey  I  had  long  ago  vowed  to  God, 
though,  through  affairs  of  state  and  other  impediments,  had  hith- 
erto been  unable  to  perform  it;  but  I  now  humbly  return  thanks 
to  God  Almighty  for  having  in  my  life  granted  me  to  yearn  after 
the  blessed  apostles,  Peter  and  Paul,  and  every  sacred  place  within 


The  Reign  of  Cnut  45 

and  without  the  city  of  Rome,  which  I  could  learn  of,  and,  accord- 
ing to  my  desire,  personally  to  venerate  and  adore.  And  this 
I  have  executed  chiefly  because  I  had  learned  from  wise  men, 
that  the  holy  apostle  Peter  had  received  from  the  Lord  the  great 
power  of  binding  and  loosing,  and  was  key-bearer  of  the  celestial 
kingdom;  and  I,  therefore,  deemed  it  extremely  useful  to  desire 
his  patronage  before  God. 

"Be  it  now  known  to  you,  that  there  was  a  great  assembly  of 
nobles  at  the  Easter  celebration,  with  the  Lord  Pope  John,  and 
the  Emperor  Conrad,  to  wit,  all  the  princes  of  the  nations  from 
Mount  Gargano  to  the  nearest  sea,  who  all  received  me  honor- 
ably, and  honored  me  with  magnificent  presents.  But  I  have 
been  chiefly  honored  by  the  emperor  with  divers  costly  gifts, 
as  well  in  golden  and  silver  vases  as  in  mantles  and  vestments 
exceedingly  precious.  I  have  therefore  spoken  with  the  emperor 
and  the  lord  pope,  and  the  princes  who  were  there,  concerning 
the  wants  of  all  my  people,  both  English  and  Danes,  that  a  more 
equitable  law  and  greater  security  might  be  granted  to  them  in 
their  journey  to  Rome,  and  that  they  might  not  be  hindered  by 
so  many  barriers,  nor  harassed  by  unjust  tolls;  and  the  emperor 
and  King  Rudolf,  who  'has  the  greater  number  of  those  barriers 
in  his  dominions,  have  agreed  to  my  demands ;  and  all  the  princes 
have  engaged  by  their  edict,  that  my  men,  whether  merchants, 
or  other  travellers  for  objects  of  devotion,  should  go  and  return 
in  security  and  peace,  without  any  constraint  of  barriers  or  tolls. 

"I  then  complained  to  the  lord  pope,  and  said,  that  it  greatly 
displeased  me,  that  from  my  archbishops  such  immense  sums  of 
money  were  exacted,  when,  according  to  usage,  they  visited  the 
apostolic  see  to  receive  the  pall;  and  it  was  decreed  that  such 
exactions  should  not  thenceforth  be  made.  And  all  that  I  have 
demanded  for  the  benefit  of  my  people  from  the  lord  pope,  from 
the  emperor,  from  King  Rudolf  and  from  the  other  princes,  through 
whose  territories  our  way  lies  to  Rome,  they  have  freely  granted, 
and  also  confirmed  their  cessions  by  oath,  with  the  witness  of 
four  archbishops  and  twenty  bishops,  and  an  innumerable  mul- 
titude of  dukes  and  nobles,  who  were  present ;  I  therefore  render 
great  thanks  to  God  Almighty  that  I  have  successfully  accom- 
plished all  that  I  desired,  as  I  had  proposed  in  my  mind,  and 
satisfied  to  the  utmost  the  wishes  of  my  people.  Now  then,  be 
it  known  to  you,  that  I  have  vowed,  as  a  suppliant  from  hence- 
forth to  justify  in  all  things  my  whole  life  to  God,  and  to  rule  the 
kingdoms  and  peoples  subjected  to  me  justly  and  piously,  to 


46  English  Historians 

maintain  equal  justice  among  all;  and  if,  through  the  intemper- 
ance of  my  youth,  or  through  negligence,  I  have  done  aught 
hitherto  contrary  to  what  is  just,  I  intend  with  the  aid  of  God  to 
amend  all.  I  therefore  conjure  and  enjoin  my  counsellors,  to 
whom  I  have  intrusted  the  counsels  of  the  kingdom,  that  from 
henceforth  they  in  no  wise,  neither  through  fear  of  me  nor  favor 
to  any  powerful  person,  consent  to,  or  suffer  to  increase  any  in- 
justice in  my  whole  kingdom:  I  enjoin  also  all  sheriffs  and  'gere- 
fan'  of  my  entire  kingdom,  as  they  would  enjoy  my  friendship 
or  their  own  security,  that  they  use  no  unjust  violence  to  any 
man,  either  rich  or  poor,  but  that  every  one,  both  noble  and 
ignoble,  enjoy  just  law,  from  which  let  them  in  no  way  swerve, 
neither  for  equal  favor,  nor  for  any  powerful  person,  nor  for  the 
sake  of  collecting  money  for  me,  for  I  have  no  need  that  money 
should  be  collected  for  me  by  iniquitous  exactions. 

"I  therefore  wish  it  to  be  made  known  to  you,  that,  returning 
by  the  same  way  that  I  departed,  I  am  going  to  Denmark,  for 
the  purpose  of  settling,  with  the  counsel  of  all  the  Danes,  firm  and 
lasting  peace  with  those  nations,  which,  had  it  been  in  their  power, 
would  have  deprived  us  of  our  life  and  kingdoms ;  but  were  unable, 
God  having  deprived  them  of  strength,  who  in  his  loving  kindness 
preserves  us  in  our  kingdoms  and  honor,  and  renders  naught 
the  power  of  our  enemies.  Having  made  peace  with  the  nations 
round  us,  and  regulated  and  tranquillized  all  our  kingdom  here 
in  the  east,  so  that  on  no  side  we  may  have  to  fear  war  or  enmities, 
I  propose  this  summer,  as  soon  as  I  can  have  a  number  of  ships 
ready,  to  proceed  to  England ;  but  I  have  sent  this  letter  beforehand, 
that  all  the  people  of  my  kingdom  may  rejoice  at  my  prosperity; 
for,  as  you  yourselves  know,  I  have  never  shrunk  from  laboring, 
nor  will  I  shrink  therefrom,  for  the  necessary  benefit  of  all  my 
people.  I  therefore  conjure  all  my  bishops  and  ealdormen,  by 
the  fealty  which  they  owe  to  me  and  to  God,  so  to  order  that, 
before  I  come  to  England,  the  debts  of  all,  which  we  owe  accord- 
ing to  the  old  law,  be  paid;  to  wit,  plough -alms,  and  a  tithe  of 
animals  brought  forth  during  the  year,  and  the  pence  which  ye 
owe  to  St.  Peter  at  Rome,  both  from  the  cities  and  villages ;  and, 
in  the  middle  of  August,  a  tithe  of  fruits,  and  at  the  feast  of  St. 
Martin,  the  first-fruits  of  things  sown,  to  the  church  of  the  parish 
in  which  each  one  dwells,  which  is  in  English  called  ciric-sceat. 
If,  when  I  come,  these  and  others  are  not  paid,  he  who  is  in  fault 
shall  be  punished  by  the  royal  power  severely  and  without  any 
remission.  Farewell." 


The  Reign  of  Cnut  47 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Worsaae,  An  Account  of  the  Danes  and  Norwegians  in  England,  Scotland, 
and  Ireland  (1852),  overemphasizes  Danish  influence.  Ramsay,  Foundations 
of  England,  Vol.  I,  chaps,  xxiii-xxv.  Hodgkin,  A  Political  History  of  Eng- 
land to  1066,  chap,  xxiii.  Green,  Conquest  of  England.  Larson,  The 
King's  Household  in  England  Before  the  Norman  Conquest,  University  of 
Wisconsin  Publications,  for  Cnut's  body-guard. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE   ANGLO-SAXON   ROYAL   COUNCIL 

IN  Anglo-Saxon  times  the  central  government  of  the  realm, 
in  so  far  as  it  was  organized  at  all,  was  vested  in  the  king  and  his 
council,  or  Witan.  The  treatment  of  this  council  by  Professor 
Freeman  in  his  Norman  Conquest  is  one  of  the  best  examples 
imaginable  of  the  way  in  which  the  history  of  ancient  institutions 
may  be  influenced  by  the  modern  theories.  Writing  at  a  time 
when  English  political  philosophy  was  permeated  with  liberalism, 
Professor  Freeman  discovered  a  limited  monarchy  in  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  period  when  the  authority  of  kings  depended  on  force, 
not  law  or  custom;  when  no  Englishman  had  ever  thought  of 
formal  constitutional  limitations  on  the  crown;  and  when  the 
ideas  of  modern  political  democracy  were  wholly  impossible  in 
theory  or  practice.  The  account  given  below  should  be  com- 
pared with  the  treatment  of  the  same  subject  in  Mr.  Chadwick's 
Anglo-Saxon  Institutions.  In  conjunction  with  this,  the  stu- 
dent should  examine  the  evidence  in  support  of  his  theory  which 
Professor  Freeman  has  brought  together  in  an  Appendix  to  the 
first  volume  of  his  work. 

§  i.   Composition  of  the  Royal  Council  l 

We  may  be  sure  that  every  Teutonic  freeman  had  a  voice  in 
the  Assembly  —  the  Gemdt,  the  Gemeinde,  the  Ekklesia  —  of  his 
own  mark.  In  fact,  he  in  some  sort  retains  it  still,  as  holding 
his  place  in  the  parish  vestry.  He  had  a  voice;  it  might  be  too 
much  to  say  that  he  had  a  vote,  for  in  an  early  state  of  things 
formal  divisions  are  not  likely  to  be  often  taken;  the  temper  of 
the  Assembly  is  found  out  by  easier  means.  But  the  man  who 

1  Freeman,  History  of  the  Norman  Conquest,  Vol.  I,  chap.  iii.  By  per- 
mission of  the  Delegates  of  the  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford. 

48 


The  Anglo-Saxon   Royal  Council  49 

clashed  his  arms  to  express  approval,  or  who  joined  in  the  un- 
mistakable sound  which  expressed  dissent,  practically  gave  as 
efficient  a  vote  as  if  he  had  solemnly  walked  out  into  a  lobby. 
The  Homeric  A  gore  is  the  type  of  every  such  Assembly,  and 
the  likeness  of  the  Homeric  Agore  may  be  seen  in  an  English 
county-meeting  to  this  day.1 

The  voice  which  the  simple  freeman,  the  ceorl,  had  in  the  As- 
sembly of  his  mark,  he  would  not  lose  in  the  Assembly  of  his 
shire,  the  Scirgemot.  The  county  court  is  to  this  day  an  assem- 
bly of  all  the  freeholders  of  the  snire.  But  the  right  of  attending 
the  Assembly  of  the  shire  would  become  really  less  valuable  than 
the  right  of  attending  the  Assembly  of  the  mark.  The  larger  the 
Assembly,  the  more  distant  the  place  of  meeting,  the  more 
difficult,  and  therefore  the  more  rare,  does  the  attendance  of 
individual  members  become,  and  the  smaller  is  the  importance  of 
each  individual  member  when  he  gets  there.  We  cannot  doubt 
that  the  Assemblies  of  the  mark,  of  the  shire,  and  of  the  kingdom . 
all  co-existed;  but  at  each  stage  of  amalgamation  the  competence 
of  the  inferior  assembly  would  be  narrowed. 

We  cannot  doubt  that  every  freeman  retained  in  theory  the  right 
of  appearing  in  the  Assembly  of  the  kingdom,  no  less  than  in  the 
Assemblies  of  the  mark  and  of  the  shire.  Expressions  are  found 
which  are  quite  enough  to  show  that  the  mass  of  the  people  were 
theoretically  looked  on  as  present  in  the  National  Assembly  and 
as  consenting  to  its  decrees.  But  such  a  right  of  attendance 
necessarily  became  purely  nugatory.  The  mass  of  the  people 
could  not  attend,  they  would  not  care  to  attend,  they  would  find 
themselves  of  no  account  if  they  did  attend.  They  would  there- 
fore, without  any  formal  abrogation  of  their  right,  gradually  cease 
from  attending.  The  idea  of  representation  had  not  yet  arisen; 
those  who  did  not  appear  in  person  had  no  means  of  appearing 
by  deputy;  of  election  or  delegation  there  is  not  the  slightest 
trace,  though  it  might  often  happen  that  those  who  stayed  away 
might  feel  that  their  rich  or  official  neighbor  who  went  would 
attend  to  their  wishes  and  would  fairly  act  in  their  interests.  By 
this  process  an  originally  democratic  assembly,  without  any  for- 
mal exclusion  of  any  class  of  its  members,  gradually  shrank  up 
into  an  aristocratic  assembly. 

I  trust  that  I  have  shown  in  another  work  how,  under  closely 

1  This  was  written  before  the  local  government  acts,  which  reorganized 
the  old  system  of  county  administration. 
E 


50  English   Historians 

analogous  circumstances,  the  Federal  Assembly  of  Achaia,  legally 
open  to  every  Achaian  citizen,  was  practically  attended  only  by 
those  who  were  both  rich  and  zealous,  and  how  it  often  happened 
that  the  members  of  the  inner  body,  the  Senate,  themselves  alone 
formed  the  Assembly.  In  the  same  way  an  assembly  of  all  the 
freemen  of  Wessex,  when  those  freemen  could  not  attend  person- 
ally, and  when  they  had  no  means  of  attending  by  representatives, 
gradually  changed  into  an  assembly  attended  by,  few  or  none  but 
the  king's  thegns.  The  great  officers  of  Church  and  State,  ealdor- 
men,  bishops,  abbots,  would  attend;  the  ordinary  thegns  would 
attend  more  laxly,  but  still  in  considerable  numbers;  the  king 
would  preside;  a  few  leading  men  would  discuss;  the  general 
mass  of  the  thegns,  whether  they  formally  voted  or  not,  would 
make  their  approval  or  disapproval  practically  felt;  no  doubt 
the  form  still  remained  of  at  least  announcing  the  resolutions  taken 
to  any  of  the  ordinary  freemen  whom  curiosity  had  drawn  to  the 
.spot;  most  likely  the  form  still  remained  of  demanding  their 
ceremonial  assent,  though  without  any  fear  that  the  habitual 
"Yea,  yea,"  would  ever  be  changed  for  "Nay,  nay."  It  is  thus 
that,  in  the  absence  of  representation,  a  democratic  franchise, 
as  applied  to  a  large  country,  gradually  becomes  unreal  or  delusive. 

A  primary  assembly,  an  Ekklesia,  a  Landesgemeinde,  is  an 
excellent  institution  in  a  commonwealth  so  small  as  to  allow  of 
its  being  really  worked  with  effect.  But  in  any  large  community 
it  either  becomes  a  tumultuous  mob,  like  the  later  Roman  Comitia 
or  the  Florentine  Parliament,  or  else  it  gradually  shrinks  up  into 
an  aristocratic  body,  as  the  old  Teutonic  assemblies  did  both  in 
England  and  on  the  Continent.  When  the  great  statesmen  of 
the  thirteenth  century,  Earl  Simon  and  King  Edward,  fully  es- 
tablished the  principle  of  representation,  they  did  but  bring  back 
the  old  state  of  things  in  another  shape.  The  ordinary  freeman 
had  gradually  lost  his  right  of  personal  attendance  in  the  National 
Assembly;  it  was  expedient  and  impossible  to  restore  that  right 
to  him  in  its  original  shape;  he  may  be  considered  as  having  in 
the  thirteenth  century  legally  surrendered  it,  and  as  having  re- 
ceived in  its  stead  the  far  more  practical  right  of  attending  by  his 
representatives. 

Thus  was  formed  that  famous  Assembly  of  our  forefathers, 
called  by  various  names  the  Mycd  Gemdt  or  Great  Meeting,  the 
Witenagemdt  or  Meeting  of  the  Wise,  sometimes  the  Mycel  Getheaht 
or  Great  Thought.  But  the  common  title  of  those  who  compose 
it  is  simply  the  Witan,  the  Sapientes,  or  Wise  Men.  In  every 


The  Anglo-Saxon   Royal   Council  51 

English  kingdom  we  find  the  royal  power  narrowly  limited  by 
the  necessity  under  which  the  king  lay,  of  acting  in  all  matters 
of  importance  by  the  consent  and  authority  of  his  Witan ;  in  other 
words,  of  his  Parliament  As  the  other  kingdoms  merged  in 
Wessex,  the  Witan  of  the  other  kingdoms  became  entitled  to  seats 
in  the  Gemot  of  Wessex,  now  become  the  great  Gemdt  of  the 
empire.  But  just  as  in  the  case  of  the  Assemblies  of  the  mark  and 
the  shire,  so  the  Gemots  of  the  other  kingdoms  seem  to  have  gone 
on  as  local  bodies,  dealing  with  local  affairs,  and  perhaps  giving 
a  formal  assent  to  the  resolutions  of  the  central  body. 

As  to  the  constitution  of  these  great  councils  in  any  English 
kingdom,  our  information  is  of  the  vaguest  kind.  The  members 
are  always  described  in  the  loosest  way.  We  find  the  Witan 
constantly  assembling,  constantly  passing  laws,  but  we  find  no 
law  prescribing  or  defining  the  constitution  of  the  Assembly  itself. 
We  find  no  trace  of  representation  or  election;  we  find  no  trace 
of  any  property  qualification;  we  find  no  trace  of  nomination  by 
the  crown,  except  in  so  far  as  all  the  great  officers  of  the  court 
and  the  kingdom  were  constantly  present.  On  the  other  hand,  we 
have  seen  that  all  the  leading  men,  ealdormen,  bishops,  abbots, 
and  a  considerable  body  of  other  thegns,  did  attend;  we  have 
seen  that  the  people  as  a  body  were  in  some  way  associated  with 
the  legislative  acts  of  their  chiefs,  that  those  acts  were  in  some 
sort  the  acts  of  the  people  themselves,  to  which  they  had  themselves 
assented,  and  were  not  merely  the  edicts  of  superiors  which  they 
had  to  obey.  There  is  no  doubt  that,  on  some  particular  occa- 
sions, some  classes  at  least  of  the  people  did  actually  take  a  part 
in  the  proceedings  of  the  National  Council;  thus  the  citizens  of 
London  are  more  than  once  recorded  to  have  taken  a  share  in 
the  election  of  kings. 

No  theory  that  I  know  of  will  explain  all  these  phenomena 
except  that  which  I  have  just  tried  to  draw  out.  This  is,  that 
every  freeman  had  an  abstract  right  to  be  present,  but  that  any 
actual  participation  in  the  proceedings  of  the  Assembly  had, 
gradually  and  imperceptibly,  come  to  be  confined  to  the  leading 
men,  to  the  king's  thegns,  strengthened  under  peculiarly  favor- 
able circumstances,  by  the  presence  of  exceptional  classes  of  free- 
men, like  the  London  citizens.  It  is  therefore  utterly  vain  for 
any  political  party  to  try  to  press  the  supposed  constitution  of 
our  ancient  National  Councils  into  the  service  of  modern  political 
warfare.  The  Meeting  of  the  Wise  has  not  a  word  to  utter  for 
or  against  any  possible  reform  bill.  In  one  sense  it  was  more 


52  English   Historians 

democratic  than  anything  that  the  most  advanced  Liberal  would 
venture  to  dream  of;  in  another  sense  it  was  more  oligarchic 
than  anything  that  the  most  unbending  Conservative  would  venture 
to  defend.  Yet  it  may  in  practice  have  fairly  represented  the 
wishes  of  the  nation ;  and  if  so,  no  people  ever  enjoyed  more  com- 
plete political  freedom  than  the  English  did  in  these  early  times. 
For  the  powers  of  the  ancient  Witenagemdt  surpassed  beyond  all 
measure  the  powers  which  our  written  law  vests  in  a  modern 
Parliament.  In  some  respects  they  surpassed  the  powers  which 
our  conventional  constitution  vests  in  the  House  of  Commons. 

§  2.   Power  of  Witan  in  Election  and  Deposition  o]  Kings 

The  king  could  do  absolutely  nothing  without  the  consent 
of  his  Wise  Men.  First  of  all,  it  was  from  them  that  he  derived 
his  political  being,  and  it  was  on  them  that  he  depended  for  its 
continuance.  The  Witan  chose  the  king  and  the  Witan  could 
depose  him.  The  power  of  deposition  is  a  power  which,  from 
its  very  nature,  can  be  exercised  but  rarely;  we  therefore  do  not 
find  many  kings  deposed  by  act  of  Parliament  either  before  or 
since  the  Norman  Conquest.  But  we  do  find  instances,  both 
before  and  since  that  event,  which  show  that,  by  the  ancient  con- 
stitution of  England,  the  Witan  of  the  land  did  possess  the  right 
of  deposing  the  sovereign,  and  that  on  great  and  emergent  occasions 
they  did  not  shrink  from  exercising  that  right.  I  will  not  attempt 
to  grapple  with  the  confused  history  of  Northumberland,  where 
at  one  time  kings  were  set  up  and  put  down  almost  daily.  Such 
revolutions  were  doubtless  as  much  the  result  of  force  as  of  any 
legal  process;  still  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  the  legal  forms  were 
commonly  observed,  and  sometimes  we  find  it  distinctly  recorded 
that  they  were. 

Let  us  confine  ourselves  to  the  better-attested  history  of  the 
line  of  Cerdic.  Five  times,  —  we  might  more  truly  say  six  times, 
—  thrice  before  and  twice  since  the  Norman  Conquest,  has 
the  king  of  the  West-Saxons  or  of  the  English  been  deprived 
of  his  kingly  office  by  the  voice  of  his  Parliament.  Sigeberht  of 
Wessex,  in  the  eighth  century,  was  deposed  by  the  vote  of  the 
General  Assembly  of  his  kingdom,  and  another  king  was  elected 
in  his  stead,  ^thelred  the  Second  was  deposed  by  one  act  of  the 
legislature  and  restored  by  another.  Harthacnut,  in  the  like 
sort,  was  deposed,  while  still  uncrowned,  from  his  West-Saxon 
kingdom,  though  he  was  afterwards  reelected  to  the  whole  kingdom 


The  Anglo-Saxon   Royal  Council  53 

of  England.  Edward  the  Second  was  deposed  by  Parliament; 
so  was  Richard  the  Second.  At  a  later  time  the  Parliament  of 
England  shrank  from  the  formal  deposition  of  James  the  Second, 
and  took  refuge  in  a  theory  of  abdication  which,  though  logically 
absurd,  practically  did  all  that  was  wanted.  But  the  Parliament 
of  Scotland  had  no  such  scruples,  and  that  body,  in  full  conformity 
with  ancient  principles,  declared  the  crown  of  Scotland  to  be  for- 
feited. In  a  land  where  everything  goes  by  precedent,  a  right 
resting  on  a  tradition  like  this,  though  its  actual  exercise  may  have 
taken  place  only  five  or  six  times  in  nine  hundred  years,  is  surely 
as  well  established  as  any  other.  Under  our  modern  constitution 
the  right  is  likely  to  remain  dormant.  The  objects  which  in  past 
times  required  the  deposition  of  the  king,  if  not  from  his  office, 
at  least  from  his  authority,  can  now  be  obtained  by  a  parliamentary 
censure  of  the  prime  minister,  or  in  the  extremest  case  by  bringing 
an  impeachment  against  him. 

If  the  Witan  could  depose  the  king,  still  more  undoubtedly 
did  the  Witan  elect  the  king.  It  is  strange  how  people's  eyes 
are  blinded  on  this  subject.  It  is  not  uncommon  to  hear  people 
talk  about  the  times  before  and  shortly  after  the  Norman  Con- 
quest as  if  the  Act  for  the  Settlement  of  the  Royal  Succession  had 
already  been  in  force  in  those  days.  It  is  strange  to  hear  a  num- 
ber of  princes,  both  before  and  since  the  Conquest,  popularly 
spoken  of  as  the  "usurpers,"  merely  because  they  came  to  the 
crown  in  a  different  way  from  that  which  modern  law  and  custom 
prescribe.  It  is  strange  that  people  who  talk  in  this  way  commonly 
forget  that  their  own  principle,  so  far  as  it  proves  anything,  proves 
a  great  deal  more  than  they  intend.  If  Harold,  Stephen,  John, 
were  usurpers,  Alfred  and  Eadward  the  Confessor  were  usurpers 
just  as  much.  .Alfred  and  Eadward,  no  less  than  John,  suc- 
ceeded by  election  to  the  exclusion  of  nephews  whom  the  modern 
law  of  England  would  look  upon  as  the  undoubted  heirs  of  the 
crown.  All  this  sounds  very  strange  to  any  one  who  understands 
our  early  history ;  but  it  may  in  some  cases  be  the  result  of  simple 
ignorance.  It  is  stranger  still  to  hear  others  talk  as  if  hereditary 
succession,  according  to  some  particular  theory  of  it,  was  a  divine 
and  eternal  law  which  could  not  be  departed  from  without  sin. 
Those  who  talk  in  this  way  should  at  least  tell  us  what  the  divine 
and  immutable  law  of  succession  is,  for  in  a  purely  historical 
view  of  things  nearly  every  kingdom  seems  to  have  a  law  of  suc- 
cession of  its  own.  Our  forefathers,  at  any  rate,  knew  nothing  of 
such  superstitions. 


54  English  Historians 

The  ancient  English  kingship  was  elective.  It  was  elective 
in  the  same  sense  in  which  all  the  old  Teutonic  kingdoms  were 
elective.  Among  a  people  in  whose  eyes  birth  was  highly  valued, 
it  was  deemed  desirable  that  the  king  should  be  the  descendant 
of  illustrious  and  royal  ancestors.  In  the  days  of  heathendom 
it  was  held  that  the  king  should  come  of  the  supposed  stock  of 
the  gods.  These  feelings  everywhere  pointed  to  some  particular 
house  as  the  royal  house,  as  the  house  whose  members  had  a  spe- 
cial claim  on  the  suffrages  of  the  electors.  In  every  kingdom  there 
was  a  royal  family,  out  of  which  alone,  under  all  ordinary  circum- 
stances, kings  were  chosen;  but  within  that  royal  family  the 
Witan  of  the  land  had  a  free  choice.  The  eldest  son  of  the  last 
king  would  doubtless  always  have  a  preference;  if  he  was  him- 
self at  all  worthy  of  the  place,  if  his  father's  memory  was  at  all 
cherished,  he  would  commonly  be  preferred  without  hesitation, 
probably  chosen  without  the  appearance  of  any  other  candidate. 

But  a  preference  was  all  to  which  he  was  entitled,  and  he  seems 
not  to  have  been  entitled  even  to  a  preference  unless  he  was  actu- 
ally the  son  of  a  crowned  king.  If  he  were  too  young  or  otherwise 
disqualified,  the  electors  passed  him  by  and  chose  some  worthier 
member  of  the  royal  family.  Alfred  and  Eadred  were  chosen 
in  preference  to  the  minor  sons  of  elder  brothers.  Eadward  the 
Confessor  was  chosen  in  preference  to  the  absent  son  of  an  elder 
brother.  At  the  death  of  Eadgar,  when  the  royal  family  contained 
only  minors  to  choose  from,  the  electors  were  divided  between  the 
elder  and  the  younger  brother.  Minors  passed  by  at  one  time 
might  or  might  not  be  elected  at  a  later  vacancy.  jEthelwold,  the 
son  of  /Ethelred  the  First,  who  had  been  passed  by  in  favor  of 
his  uncle  Alfred,  was  again  passed  by  in  Alfred's  death  because 
no  claim  could  compare  with  that  of  Eadward,  the  worthy  son 
of  the  most  glorious  of  fathers.  The  children  of  Eadmund  were 
passed  by  in  favor  of  their  uncle  Eadred,  but  on  Eadred's  death 
the  choice  fell  on  the  formerly  excluded  Eadwig.  And  as  a  certain 
preference  was  acquired  by  birth,  a  certain  preference  was  acquired 
by  the  recommendation  of  the  late  king.  So  Eadgar  recommended 
his  elder  son  Eadward  to  the  electors;  so  Eadward  the  Confessor 
recommended  Harold,  ^thelwulf  had  long  before  attempted, 
by  the  help  of  a  will  confirmed  by  the  Witan,  to  establish  a  peculiar 
law  of  succession,  which  soon  broke  down.  But  it  is  clear  that 
a  certain  importance  was  attached  to  the  wishes  of  a  deceased 
and  respected  king  as  conveying  a  distinct  preference.  But  it 
conveyed  nothing  more  than  a  preference ;  the  person  who  enjoyed 


The  Anglo-Saxon  Royal  Council  55 

this  advantage,  whether  by  birth  or  nomination,  could  still  be 
passed  by  without  breach  of  constitutional  right.  From  these 
principles  it  follows  that,  as  any  disqualified  person  in  the  royal 
family  might  be  passed  by,  so,  if  the  whole  family  were  disqualified, 
the  whole  family  might  be  passed  by.  That  is  to  say,  the  election 
of  Harold,  the  son  of  Godwine,  the  central  point  of  this  history,  was 
perfectly  good  in  every  point  of  view.  The  earlier  election  of  Cnut 
was  equally  good  in  point  of  form;  only  it  was  an  election  under 
duresse  —  duresse  a  little,  but  not  much,  stronger  than  that  under 
which  an  English  chapter  elects  its  bishop. 

§  3.    Share  of  the  Witan  in  the  Government  of  the  Realm 

An  ancient  English  king  was  then,  as  his  very  title  implied,  not 
the  father  of  his  people,  but  their  child,  their  creation.  And  the 
Assembly  which  had  elected  him,  and  which  could  depose  him, 
claimed  to  direct  him  by  its  advice  and  authority  in  almost  every 
exercise  of  the  kingly  power.  Every  act  of  government  of  any 
importance  was  done,  not  by  the  king  alone,  but  by  the  king  and 
his  Witan.  The  great  council  of  the  nation  had  its  active  share 
even  in  those  branches  of  government  which  modern  constitutional 
theories  mark  out  as  the  special  domain  of  the  executive.  That 
laws  were  ordained  and  taxes  imposed  by  the  authority  of  the 
Witan,  that  they  sat  as  the  highest  court  for  the  trial  of  exalted 
and  dangerous  offenders,  is  only  what  we  should  look  for  from  the 
analogy  of  modern  times.  It  is  more  important  to  find  that  the 
king  and  his  Witan,  and  not  the  king  alone,  concluded  treaties, 
made  grants  of  folkland,  ordained  the  assemblage  of  fleets  and 
armies,  appointed  and  deposed  the  great  officers  of  Church  and 
State.  Of  the  exercise  of  all  these  powers  by  the  assembled 
Witan  we  shall  find  abundant  examples  in  the  course  of  this  history. 

Now  these  are  the  very  powers  which  a  modern  House  of  Com- 
mons shrinks  from  directly  exercising.  These  are  the  powers 
which,  under  our  present  system,  Parliament  prefers  to  intrust 
to  ministers  in  whom  it  has  confidence — ministers  whom  it  virtu- 
ally appoints,  and  whom  it  can  virtually  dismiss  without  any 
formal  ceremony  of  deposition.  And,  in  our  present  state  of 
things,  little  or  no  harm  and  some  direct  good  comes  from  Parlia- 
ment preferring  an  indirect  course  of  action  on  these  subjects. 
But  in  an  earlier  state  of  things,  a  more  direct  agency  of  the  Par- 
liament or  other  National  Assembly  is  absolutely  necessary.  The 
Assembly  has  to  deal  not  with  a  ministry  whom  it  can  create  and 


56  English  Historians 

destroy  without  any  formal  action,  but  with  a  personal  king 
whom  it  has  indeed  elected  and  whom  it  can  depose,  but  whose 
election  and  deposition  are  solemn  national  acts,  his  deposition 
indeed  being  the  rarest  and  most  extreme  of  all  national  acts. 
In  such  a  state  of  things  the  power  of  the  king  may  be  strictly 
limited  by  law;  but  within  the  limits  which  the  law  prescribes  to 
him  he  acts  according  to  his  own  will  and  pleasure,  or  accord- 
ing to  the  advice  of  counsellors  who  are  purely  of  his  own 
choosing. 

In  such  a  state  of  things  the  king  and  the  nation  are  brought 
face  to  face,  and  it  is  needful  that  the  National  Assembly  should 
have  a  more  direct  control  over  affairs  than  is  at  all  needful  when 
the  ingenious  device  of  a  responsible  ministry  is  interposed  be- 
tween king  and  Parliament.  Long  after  the  days  of  our  ancient 
Witenagemdts,  in  the  days  of  Edward  the  Third,  for  instance,  Par- 
liament was  consulted  about  wars  and  negotiations  in  a  much 
more  direct  way  than  it  is  now.  The  control  of  Parliament  over 
the  executive  is  certainly  not  less  effective  now  than  it  was  then ; 
but  the  nature  of  our  present  system  makes  it  desirable  that  the 
control  of  Parliament  should  be  exercised  in  a  less  direct  way  than 
it  was  then.  Our  present  system  avoids,  above  all  things,  all 
possibility  of  direct  personal  collision  between  Parliament  and 
the  sovereign.  But  such  direct  personal  collisions  form  the 
staple  of  English  history  from  the  thirteenth  century  onwards. 
In  earlier  times  we  seldom  come  across  any  record  of  the  de- 
bates, though  we  often  know  the  determinations  of  our  National 
Councils. 

How  far  such  collisions  commonly  took  place  in  early  times  we 
have  but  small  means  of  knowing.  They  were  perhaps  less  to  be 
expected  than  they  were  some  centuries  later.  The  Plantagenet 
kings  had  to  deal  with  their  Parliaments  as  with  something  ex- 
ternal to  themselves,  something  which  laid  petitions  before  them 
which  they  could  accept  or  reject  at  pleasure.  A  struggle  in  those 
days  was  a  struggle  between  the  king  and  an  united  Parliament. 
Nowadays,  as  we  all  know,  the  struggle  takes  place  within  the  walls 
of  Parliament  itself.  But  we  can  well  believe  that,  in  this  respect 
as  in  so  many  others,  the  earliest  times  were  really  more  like  our 
own  than  the  intermediate  centuries  were. 

An  ancient  Witenagem6t  did  not  petition,  it  decreed;  it  con- 
firmed the  acts  of  the  king  which,  without  the  assent  of  the  Witan, 
had  no  validity;  it  was  not  a  body  external  to  the  king,  but  a  body 
of  which  the  king  was  the  head  in  a  much  more  direct  sense  than 


The  Anglo-Saxon   Royal  Council  57 

he  could  be  said  to  be  the  head  of  a  later  mediaeval  Parliament. 
The  king  and  his  Witan  acted  together;  the  king  could  do  nothing 
without  the  Witan,  and  the  Witan  could  do  nothing  without  the 
king;  they  were  no  external,  half-hostile  body;  they  were  his 
own  Council,  surrounding  and  advising  him.  Direct  collisions  be- 
tween the  king  on  the  one  hand  and  an  united  Gemot  on  the  other 
were  not  likely  to  be  common.  This  is  indeed  mere  conjecture, 
but  it  is  a  conjecture  to  which  the  phenomena  of  the  case  seem 
inevitably  to  lead  us.  But  of  the  great  powers  of  the  Witena- 
gemot,  of  its  direct  participation  in  all  important  acts  of  government, 
there  can  be  no  doubt  at  all.  The  fact  is  legibly  written  in  every 
page  of  our  early  history. 

§  4.    Antiquity  oj  English  Liberties 

The  vast  increase  of  the  power  of  the  crown  after  the  Norman 
Conquest,  the  gradual  introduction  of  a  systematic  feudal  juris- 
prudence, did  much  to  lessen  the  authority  and  dignity  of  the 
National  Councils.  The  idea  of  a  nation  and  its  chief,  of  a  king 
and  his  counsellors,  almost  died  away;  the  king  became  half 
despot,  half  mere  feudal  lord.  England  was  never  without 
National  Assemblies  of  some  kind  or  other,  but  from  the  Conquest 
in  the  eleventh  century  till  the  second  birth  of  freedom  in  the 
thirteenth,  our  National  Assemblies  do  not  stand  out  in  the  same 
distinct  and  palpable  shape  in  which  they  stand  out  both  in  earlier 
and  in  later  times.  Here  again  we  owe  our  thanks  to  those  illus- 
trious worthies,  from  the  authors  of  the  Great  Charter  onwards, 
who,  in  so  many  ways,  won  back  for  us  our  ancient  constitution  in 
another  shape.  I  have  said  that  no  political  party  can  draw  any 
support  for  its  own  peculiar  theories  from  that  obscurest  of  sub- 
jects, the  constitution  of  the  Witenagemot.  But  no  lover  of  our 
historic  liberties  can  see  without  delight  how  venerable  a  thing 
those  liberties  are,  how  vast  and  how  ancient  are  the  rights  and 
powers  of  an  English  Parliament.  Our  ancient  Gemots  enjoyed 
every  power  of  a  modern  Parliament,  together  with  some  powers 
which  modern  Parliaments  shrink  from  claiming.  Even  such  a 
matter  of  detail  as  the  special  security  granted  to  the  persons  of 
members  of  the  two  houses  has  been  traced,  and  not  without 
a  show  of  probability,  to  an  enactment  which  stands  at  the  very 
front  of  English  secular  jurisprudence,  the  second  among  the  laws 
ordained  by  our  first  Christian  king  and  the  Witan  of  his  kingdom 
of  Kent. 


58  English   Historians 

§  5.    Importance  of  the  Personal  Character  o/  the  King 

As  the  powers  of  the  Witan  were  thus  extensive,  as  the  king 
could  do  no  important  act  of  government  without  their  consent, 
some  may  hastily  leap  to  the  conclusion  that  an  ancient  English 
king  was  a  mere  puppet  in  the  hands  of  the  National  Council. 
No  inference  could  be  more  mistaken.  Nothing  is  clearer  in 
our  earlier  history  than  the  personal  agency  of  the  king  in  every- 
thing that  is  done,  and  the  unspeakable  difference  between  a  good 
and  a  bad  king.  The  truth  is  that  in  an  early  state  of  society 
almost  everything  depends  on  the  personal  character  of  the  king. 
An  able  king  is  practically  absolute ;  under  a  weak  king  the  govern- 
ment falls  into  utter  anarchy  and  chaos.  Change  the  scene,  as 
we  shall  presently  do  in  our  narrative,  from  the  days  of  Eadgar  to 
those  of  ^Ethelred ;  change  it  again  from  the  long,  dreary,  hopeless 
reign  of  .^thelred  to  the  few  months  of  superhuman  energy  which 
form  the  reign  of  the  hero  Eadmund ;  compare  the  nine  months  of 
Harold  with  the  two  months  which  followed  his  fall,  and  we  shall 
see  how  the  whole  fate  of  the  nation  turned  upon  the  personal 
character  of  its  sovereign. 

With  such  witnesses  before  us,  we  can  the  better  understand  how 
our  forefathers  would  have  scouted  the  idea  —  if  the  idea  had 
ever  occurred  to  them  —  of  risking  the  destiny  of  the  nation  on 
the  accidents  of  strict  hereditary  succession,  and  how  wisely 
they  determined  that  the  king  must  be,  if  not  the  worthiest  of 
the  nation,  at  any  rate  the  worthiest  of  the  royal  house.  The  un- 
happy reign  of  /Ethelred  showed  the  bad  side  of  even  that  limited 
application  of  the  hereditary  principle  which  was  all  that  they 
admitted.  Under  her  great  kings,  England  had  risen  from  her 
momentary  overthrow  to  an  imperial  dominion.  At  home  she 
possessed  a  strong  and  united  government,  and  her  position  in  the 
face  of  other  nations  was  one  which  made  her  alliance  to  be 
courted  by  the  foremost  princes  of  Europe.  The  accession  of 
the  minor  son  of  Eadgar,  a  child  who,  except  in  his  crimes  and 
vices,  never  went  beyond  childhood,  dragged  down  the  glorious 
fabric  into  the  dust,  so  greatly  did  national  welfare  and  national 
misfortune  depend  on  the  personal  character  of  the  king. 

The  king,  it  is  true,  could  do  nothing  without  his  Witan,  but  as 
his  Witan  could  do  nothing  without  him,  he  was  not  a  shadow  or 
a  puppet,  but  a  most  important  personal  agent.  He  was  no  more  a 
puppet  than  the  leader  of  the  House  of  Commons  is  a  puppet. 
We  may  be  sure  that  the  king  and  his  immediate  advisers  always 


The  Anglo-Saxon  Royal  Council  59 

had  a  practical  initiative,  and  that  the  body  of  the  Witan  did 
little  but  accept  or  reject  their  proposals.  We  may  be  sure  that  a 
king  fit  for  his  place,  an  Alfred  or  an  ^Ethelstan,  met  with  nothing 
that  could  be  called  opposition,  but  wielded  the  Assembly  at  his 
will.  Princes  invested  with  far  smaller  constitutional  powers  than 
those  of  an  ancient  English  king  have  become  the  ruling  spirits 
of  commonwealths  which  denied  them  any  sort  of  independent 
action. 

When  a  great  king  sat  upon  the  West-Saxon  throne  we  may  be 
sure  that,  while  every  constitutional  form  was  strictly  observed, 
the  votes  of  the  Witan  were  guided  in  everything  by  the  will  of 
the  king.  But  when  the  king  had  no  will,  or  a  will  which  the 
Witan  could  not  consent  to,  then  of  course  the  machine  gave  way 
and  nothing  was  to  be  seen  but  confusion  and  every  evil  work. 
Again,  the  king  was  not  only  the  first  mover,  he  was  also  the  main 
doer  of  everything.  The  Witan  decreed,  but  it  was  the  king  who 
carried  out  their  decrees.  Weighty  as  was  the  influence  of  his 
personal  character  on  the  nature  of  the  resolutions  to  be  passed, 
its  influence  was  weightier  still  on  the  way  in  which  those  resolu- 
tions were  to  be  carried  out.  Under  a  good  king,  council  and 
execution  went  hand  in  hand ;  under  a  weak  or  wicked  king,  there 
was  no  place  found  for  either.  Sometimes  disgraceful  resolutions 
were  passed;  sometimes  wise  and  good  resolutions  were  never 
carried  into  effect.  The  Witan  under  ^Ethelred  sometimes  voted 
money  to  buy  off  the  Danes ;  sometimes  they  voted  armies  to  fight 
against  them;  but,  with  ^Ethelred  to  carry  out  the  decrees,  it 
mattered  little  what  the  decrees  were. 

Add  to  all  this  the  enormous  influence  which  attached  to  the  king 
from  his  having  all  the  chief  men  of  the  land  bound  to  him  by  the 
personal  tie  of  thegnship.  He  was  the  Cyne-hlaford,  at  once  the 
king  of  the  nation  and  the  personal  lord  of  each  individual. 
Though  his  grants  of  folkland  and  his  nominations  to  the  highest 
offices  required  the  assent  of  the  \Vitan,  yet  in  these  matters,  above 
all,  his  initiative  would  be  undoubted;  the  Witan  had  only  to 
confirm  and  they  would  seldom  be  tempted  to  reject  the  proposals 
which  the  king  laid  before  them.  He  was  not  less  the  fountain 
of  honor  and  the  fountain  of  wealth,  because  in  the  disposal  of 
both  he  had  certain  decent  ceremonies  to  go  through.  Add  to  all 
this,  that  in  unsettled  times  there  is  a  special  chance,  both  of  acts 
of  actual  oppression  which  the  law  is  not  strong  enough  to  redress, 
and  of  acts  of  energy  beyond  the  law  which  easily  win  popular 
condonation  in  the  case  of  a  victorious  and  beloved  monarch. 


60  English  Historians 

Altogether,  narrowly  limited  as  were  the  legal  powers  of  an  ancient 
English  king,  his  will,  or  lack  of  will,  had  the  main  influence  on  the 
destinies  of  the  nation,  and  his  personal  character  was  of  as  much 
moment  to  the  welfare  of  the  State  as  the  personal  character  of  an 
absolute  ruler. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Kemble,  Saxons  in  England,  Vol.  II,  chaps,  f  and  vi,  exaggerates 
the  importance  of  the  Witan.  Stubbs,  Constitutional  History  oj  England, 
chap,  vi,  based  largely  on  Kemble.  Chadwick,  Studies  in  Anglo-Saxon 
Institutions  (1905),  chap,  be  and  Excursus  IV. 


PART  II 

FEUDALISM  AND  NATIONALISM 
CHAPTER   I 

THE  MEN  OF  LONDON  AND  THE  CORONATION  OF  WILLIAM  THE 

CONQUEROR 

THE  Norman  Conquest  is  one  of  the  most  striking  events  in 
English  history,  and  doubtless  it  constituted  one  of  the  greatest 
crises  in  that  history,  in  so  far  as  it  brought  England  into  closer 
contact  with  continental  life  and  ecclesiastical  polity  and  gave  the 
nation  a  stronger  and  better-organized  central  government.  It  is 
difficult  to  determine,  however,  just  what  precise  results  are  to  be 
attributed  to  that  Conquest.  Life  in  town  and  country  probably 
flowed  along  in  the  old  course,  and  a  strong  king  might  have  been 
evolved  from  among  the  contending  princes  after  Edward  the 
Confessor's  death.  Such  speculation  is  nevertheless  idle,  as  William 
of  Normandy  determined  to  secure  the  crown  for  himself,  and, 
armed  by  the  pope's  sanction,  he  and  his  followers  struck  the 
first  blow  for  the  throne  at  the  battle  of  Hastings.  Not  long 
afterwards  the  metropolis  of  the  realm  yielded  to  the  conqueror. 

§  i.    The  Conqueror's  Preparations  for  the  Capture  of  London1 

The  men  of  London,  whose  forefathers  had  beaten  back  Swegen 
and  Cnut,  whose  brothers  had  died  around  the  standard  of  Harold, 
were  not  men  to  surrender  their  mighty  city,  defended  by  its 
broad  river  and  its  Roman  walls,  without  at  least  meeting  the 
invader  in  the  field.  William,  master  of  Dover,  Canterbury,  and 

1  Freeman,  History  of  the  Norman  Conquest,  Vol.  Ill,  chap.  xvi.  By 
permission  of  the  Delegates  of  the  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford. 

61 


62  English  Historians 

Winchester,  now  directed  his  march  along  the  old  Roman  road, 
directly  on  the  great  city.  He  marched  on,  ravaging,  burning, 
and  slaughtering  as  he  went,  and  drew  near  to  the  southern  bank 
of  the  river.  One  account  seems  to  describe  him  as  occupying 
Westminster,  —  therefore  as  crossing  the  river,  —  as  planting 
his  military  engines  by  St.  Peter's  minster,  and  as  beginning,  or 
at  least  threatening,  a  formal  siege  of  the  city.  But  nothing  in 
the  whole  story  is  plainer  than  that  WTilliam  did  not  cross  the  river 
till  long  after.  A  more  credible  version  represents  him  as  send- 
ing before  him  a  body  of  five  hundred  knights,  whether  simply  to 
reconnoitre  or  in  the  hope  of  gaining  anything  by  a  sudden  attack. 
The  citizens  sallied ;  a  skirmish  followed ;  the  English  were  beaten 
back  within  the  walls;  the  southern  suburb  of  the  city,  South- 
wark,  where  Godwine  had  waited  in  his  own  house  for  the  gather- 
ing of  two  memorable  assemblies,  was  given  to  the  flames.  The 
pride  of  the  citizens  was  supposed  to  be  somewhat  lowered  by  this 
twofold  blow ;  but  it  is  plain  that  William  did  not  yet  venture  any 
direct  attack  on  the  city.  His  ships  were  far  away,  and  the  bridge 
of  London  would  have  been  a  spot  even  less  suited  for  an  onslaught 
of  Norman  cavalry  than  the  hillside  of  Senlac.  He  trusted  to  the 
gradual  working  of  fear  and  of  isolation  even  on  the  hearts  of 
those  valiant  citizens. 

He  kept  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Thames,  harrying  as  he  went, 
through  Surrey,  Hampshire,  and  Berkshire,  till  at  Wallingford  a 
ford  and  a  bridge  supplied  safe  and  convenient  means  of  crossing 
for  his  army.  He  was  now  in  the  shire  of  the  brave  sheriff  Godric, 
in  a  king's  town,  part  of  which  seems  to  have  been  set  aside  as  a 
sort  of  special  barrack  or  garrison  for  the  king's  house-carls.  But 
the  stout  heart  of  the  Lord  of  Fifhide  had  ceased  to  beat ;  sheriff 
and  house-carls  alike  had  dealt  their  last  blow  for  England  on 
the  far  South  Saxon  hill.  No  force  was  ready  on  the  bridge  of 
Wallingford  to  bar  the  approach  of  the  invader.  There  is  even 
reason  to  think  that  the  chief  man  of  the  place,  perhaps  the  sheriff 
of  the  neighboring  shire  of  Oxford,  Wiggod  of  Wallingford,  fa- 
vored the  progress  of  the  invader.  He  had  been  in  high  favor 
with  Eadward,  and  was  afterwards  in  high  favor  with  William, 
and  a  son  of  his  lived  to  die  fighting  for  William  in  a  more  worthy 
cause.  However  this  may  be,  William  passed  the  great  border 
stream  unhindered,  and  for  the  first  time  set  foot  on  Mercian  soil. 

He  was  now  on  the  old  battle-ground  of  Bensington,  whence 
Angle  and  Saxon,  now  being  fast  united  in  one  common  bondage, 
had  in  other  days  fought  out  their  border  quarrels.  He  passed 


The  Coronation  of  William  the  Conqueror     63 

beneath  the  hills,  so  marked  in  the  distance  by  their  well-known 
clumps,  where  the  Briton  had,  in  earlier  days,  bid  defiance  to  the 
conquerors  of  the  world.  He  was  now  within  the  diocese  whence 
the  voice  of  England  had  driven  his  unworthy  countryman,  the 
Norman  Ulf,  the  bishop  who  did  naught  bishoplike.  He  was 
now  within  the  earldom  which  his  own  hand  had  made  vacant, 
when  he  avenged  the  fall  of  his  Spanish  horse  by  the  fall  of  a  son 
of  Godwine.  But  he  still  did  not  march  straight  upon  London. 
His  plan  evidently  was  to  surround  the  city  with  a  wide  circle  of 
conquered  and  desolated  country,  till  sheer  isolation  should  compel 
its  defenders  to  submit.  South  and  west  of  London  he  was  master 
from  Dover  to  Wallingford ;  his  course  was  now  to  march  on,  keep- 
ing at  some  distance  from  the  city  till  the  lands  north  and  east  of 
London  should  be  as  thoroughly  wasted  and  subdued  as  the  lands 
south  of  the  Thames.  He  followed  out  this  plan  till  he  reached 
Berkhampstead  in  Hertfordshire.  But  by  this  time  the  spirit  of 
London  itself  had  failed.  The  blow  which  had  been  dealt  at 
Senlac  had  at  last  reached  the  heart  of  England.  At  Berkhamp-' 
stead  the  second  act  of  William's  great  work  was  played  out.  The 
Conquest  there  received  the  formal  ratification  of  the  conquered. 

§  2.    London  Negotiates  with  the  Conqueror 

» 

The  chief  military  command  in  London  was  in  the  hands  of  the 
wounded  staller  Esegar,  the  sheriff  of  the  Middle-Saxons.  His 
w^und  was  so  severe  that  he  could  neither  walk  nor  ride,  but  was 
carried  about  the  city  in  a  litter.  But  he  is  spoken  of  as  being 
the.,  soul  of  all  the  counsels  taken  by  the  defenders  of  London. 
The  defection  of  the  Northern  earls  had  left  him  the  layman  of 
highest  rank  in  the  city,  the  natural  protector  and  military  adviser 
of  the  young  king-elect.  A  tale  is  told  of  messages  which  are 
said  to  have  gone  to  and  fro  between  Esegar  and  William.  But 
it  is  hard  to  know  how  far  we  ought  to  believe  a  story  which  im- 
plies that  London  was  besieged  by  William,  which  it  certainly  was 
not.  William,  we  are  told,  sent  a  secret  message  to  Esegar.  He 
asked  only  for  a  formal  acknowledgment  of  his  right.  Let  Will- 
iam have  the  name  of  king,  and  all  things  in  the  kingdom  should 
be  ruled  according  to  the  bidding  of  the  sheriff  of  the  Middle- 
Saxons.  Esegar  listens ;  he  has  no  intention  of  yielding  even  thus 
far,  but  he  thinks  it  prudent  to  dissemble.  He  summons  an  As- 
sembly, among  the  members  of  which  we  may  possibly  discern  the 
forerunners  of  the  famous  aldermen  of  London.  He  sets  forth 


64  English  Historians 

the  general  sad  state  of  the  country  and  the  special  dangers  of  the 
besieged  city.  It  would  be  prudent  to  send  a  cunning  messenger 
who  should  entrap  the  invader  with  wily  words.  Let  him  offer  a 
feigned  submission,  which  might  at  least  cause  delay  and  stave  off 
the  immediate  danger.  The  messenger  went;  but  to  deceive 
William  was  found  to  be  no  such  easy  matter.  The  fox  —  it  is 
his  own  poetical  panegyrist  who  makes  the  comparison  —  is 
not  to  be  caught  in  a  trap  laid  in  open  day.  William  pretends 
to  accept  the  proposals  of  Esegar,  the  exact  details  of  which  are 
not  told  us.  But  he  wins  over  the  messenger  by  crafty  speeches, 
backed  by  gifts  and  by  promises  greater  than  the  gifts.  The 
messenger  goes  back  to  London  to  enlarge  on  the  might,  the  wis- 
dom, the  just  rights,  and  the  various  excellencies  of  William 
The  invader  is  one  whom  it  is  on  every  ground  hopeless  to  resist. 
His  intentions  are  friendly;  he  offers  peace  to  the  city;  wisdom 
dictates  one  course  only,  that  of  immediate  submission  to  such  a 
candidate  for  the  kingdom.  The  people  applaud,  the  Senate 
approves ;  both  orders  —  their  distinct  action  is  clearly  marked  — 
vote  at  once  to  forsake  the  cause  of  the  young  $)theling,  and  to 
make  their  submission  to  the  conquering  duke. 

Whatever  truth  there  may  be  in  this  story,  it  is  certain  that  a 
resolution  to  the  same  effect  as  that  described  by  the  poet  was  act- 
ually come  to  within  the  walls  of  London.  While  William  was 
at  Berkhampstead,  an  embassy  came  to  submit  and  to  do  homage 
to  him  —  an  embassy  which  might  be  fairly  looked  upon  as  having 
a  right  to  speak  in  the  name  of  at  least  Southern  England.  Thither 
came  Eadgar,  a  king  deposed  before  he  was  full  king.  Thither 
came  the  metropolitan  of  York,  perhaps  also  the  metropolitan 
of  Canterbury.  Thither  came  at  least  two  other  bishops,  Wulf- 
stan  of  Worcester  and  Walter  of  Hereford,  and  with  them  came 
the  best  men  of  London,  and  many  other  of  the  chief  men  of  Eng- 
land. And  on  a  sad  and  shameful  errand  they  came.  They 
came  to  make  their  submission  to  the  invader  and  to  pray  him 
to  accept  the  crown  of  England.  The  defection  of  the  Northern 
earls,  the  terror  struck  into  men's  hearts  by  William's  ravages,  had 
done  their  work.  They  bowed  to  him  for  need.  Hard,  indeed, 
the  need  was,  but  the  need  stared  them  in  the  face;  men  of  cold 
wisdom  even  said  that  they  ought  to  have  bowed  to  William  long 
before.  They  sware  oaths  to  him  and  gave  him  hostages. 

William  received  his  new  subjects  graciously ;  to  the  young  rival 
who  had  so  easily  fallen  before  him  he  was  specially  gracious. 
The  kiss  of  peace  was  given  by  the  Conqueror  to  Eadgar  and  to 


The  Coronation  of  William  the  Conqueror     65 

his  companions,  and  he  pledged  his  word  that  he  would  be  a  good 
lord  to  them.  Such  a  submission  on  the  part  of  so  many  men  of 
such  lofty  rank  might  of  itself  be  deemed  equivalent  to  an  election 
to  the  crown.  But  a  more  direct  requisition  seems  not  to  have 
been  wanting.  It  was  probably  at  Berkhampstead  that  William 
was,  as  we  are  told,  prayed  by  the  chief  men  of  England,  spiritual 
and  temporal,  to  accept  the  vacant  crown.  They  needed  a  king; 
they  had  always  been  used  to  submit  to  a  crowned  king  and  to 
none  other.  Here  we  may  clearly  see  the  almost  superstitious 
importance  which  was  then  attached  to  the  ceremony  of  coronation. 
The  uncrowned  Eadgar  had  been  no  full  king,  and  he  had  been 
unable  to  defend  his  people.  The  armed  candidate  who  was 
encamped  at  Berkhampstead  was  no  longer  to  be  withstood  by 
force  of  arms.  The  best  course  was  to  acknowledge  and  receive 
him  at  once,  and  by  the  mystic  rite  of  consecration  to  change  him 
from  a  foreign  invader  into  an  English  king. 

We  must  bear  in  mind  that  men  were  living  who  could  remember 
how  an  earlier  foreign  invader  had  been  changed  into  an  English 
king,  into  a  king  who  had  won  his  place  among  the  noblest  of  Eng- 
land's native  worthies.  England  had  accepted  Cnut  the  Dane, 
and  she  had  flourished  under  him  as  she  had  never  flourished  before 
or  since.  Men  might  hope  that  the  like  good  luck  would  follow  on 
their  acceptance' of  William  the  Norman.  William,  in  truth,  prom- 
ised better  than  Cnut  in  every  way.  Instead  of  a  half-beaten  sea- 
king,  he  was  the  model  prince  of  Europe,  the  valiant  soldier,  the 
wise,  ruler,  the  pious  son  of  the  Church,  the  prince  who,  among 
unparalleled  difficulties,  had  raised  his  paternal  duchy  to  a  state  of 
prosperity  and  good  government  which  made  it  the  wonder  and  the 
envy  of  continental  lands.  The  hopes  of  those  who  dreamed  that 
William  would  prove  a  second  Cnut  were  doomed  to  be  woefully 
disappointed.  But  such  hopes  were  at  the  time,  if  not  unreason- 
able, at  all  events  plausible.  It  is  easy  to  understand  how  men 
may  have  been  led  away  by  them.  Men,  too,  especially  churchmen, 
might  easily  argue  that  the  event  had  proved  that  it  was  God's 
will  that  William  should  be  received.  Harold  had  appealed  to 
God's  judgment  upon  the  field  of  battle,  and  the  verdict  of  God's 
judgment  had  been  given  against  him.  Those  who  had  fought 
under  the  banner  of  the  Fighting  Man  against  the  banner  of  the 
Apostle  were  proved  to  have  been  in  truth  men  fighting  against  God. 

All  these  arguments,  backed  by  the  presence  in  the  land  of 
William's  victorious  army,  would  have  their  effect  upon  men's 
minds.  We  can  even  understand  that  they  might  produce  some- 


66  English  Historians 

thing  more  than  a  mere  sullen  submission  to  physical  force.  We 
can  understand  that  men  may  have  brought  themselves  to  a  belief, 
unwilling  indeed,  but  not  either  absolutely  compulsory  or  abso- 
lutely hypocritical,  that  the  king  who  had  been  so  visibly  sent  to 
them  by  the  hand  of  God  ought  to  be  frankly  and  loyally  acknowl- 
edged. We  can  believe  that  the  request  made  by  so  many  Eng- 
lishmen that  the  Conqueror  would  at  once  assume  the  English 
crown  was  made  in  an  artificial  but  not  a  dishonest  frame  of 
mind.  It  was  made  in  that  state  of  artificial  hope,  even  of  artificial 
eagerness,  which  is  not  uncommon  in  men  who  are  striving  to 
make  the  best  of  a  bad  bargain.  For  the  moment  they  really 
wished  for  William  as  their  king.  But  it  was  only  for  the  moment 
that  the  wish  lasted. 

§  3.   William  Accepts  the  Crown  of  England 

The  crown  was  thus  offered  to  William,  but  we  are  told  that  it 
was  by  no  means  eagerly  accepted  by  him.  He  summoned  a  Coun- 
cil of  his  chief  officers  and  advisers  —  we  are  hardly  to  suppose 
a  Norman  military  Gemot  —  and  laid  the  matter  before  them. 
Possibly  he  merely  wished  to  prove  the  minds  of  his  friends  and 
followers;  possibly  the  arguments  which  they  brought  forward 
had  real  weight  with  him.  Was  it,  he  asked,  expedient  for  him 
to  take  the  crown,  while  he  was  still  so  far  from  being  in  complete 
possession  of  the  kingdom?  We  must  remember  that  though 
the  prelates  of  York,  Worcester,  and  Hereford  were  in  William's 
camp,  yet  York,  Worcester,  and  Hereford  were  not  in  William's 
hands.  William  had  actual  possession  only  of  the  South- 
eastern shires.  His  authority  reached  westward  as  far  as  Winches- 
ter, northward  as  far  as  his  plunderers  could  go  from  the  spot 
where  he  was  now  encamped.  Was  it  prudent  then,  he  argued, 
so  hastily  to  assume  a  kingship  which,  in  the  greater  part  of  the 
land,  would  still  be  kingship  only  in  name  ?  He  wished,  moreover, 
—  and  here  we  may  believe  that  William  spoke  from  the  heart,— 
that  whenever  he  should  be  raised  into  a  crowned  king,  his  be- 
loved and  faithful  duchess  might  be  there  to  share  his  honors. 
He  asked,  then,  the  opinion  of  the  Assembly  as  to  the  immediate 
acceptance  of  the  crown  which  was  pressed  upon  him. 

The  military  Council  was  strongly  in  favor  of  William's 
acceptance  of  the  crown,  but  the  decisive  answer  was  given,  not 
by  any  of  William's  native  subjects,  but  by  one  of  the  most 
eminent  of  the  foreign  volunteers.  Hamon,  Viscount  of  Thouars, 


The  Coronation  of  William  the  Conqueror     67 

a  man,  we  are  told,  as  ready  of  speech  as  he  was  valiant  in  fight, 
had,  on  the  height  of  Telham,  been  the  first  to  hail  the  duke  as 
a  future  king.  He  was  not  unwilling  that  the  words  which  had 
then  fallen  from  him  as  an  omen  should  now  assume  full  shape  and 
substance.  The  Aquitanian  chief  began  in  a  courtly  strain  by 
praising  the  condescension  of  the  general  who  deigned  to  take 
the  opinion  of  his  soldiers  on  such  a  point.  It  was  not,  he 
said,  a  matter  for  much  deliberation,  when  all  were  united  in  one 
wish.  It  was  the  desire  of  every  man  in  William's  army  to  see 
his  lord  become  a  king  as  soon  as  might  be.  To  make  William 
a  king,  was  the  very  object  for  which  all  of  them  had  crossed  the 
sea;  the  object  for  which  they  had  exposed  themselves  to  the 
dangers  of  the  deep  and  of  the  battle.  As  for  England  itself, 
the  wisest  men  in  England,  the  highest  in  rank  and  character, 
were  there,  offering  the  kingship  of  their  land  to  William.  They 
doubtless  knew  best  what  was  for  the  good  of  their  own  country. 
They  clearly  saw  in  William  a  fit  man  to  reign  over  them,  one  under 
whose  rule  themselves  and  their  country  would  flourish.  An  offer 
thus  pressed  on  him  from  all  sides  it  was  clearly  his  duty  to  accept. 
William,  we  are  told,  weighed  what  was  said,  and  determined  at 
once  to  accept  the  crown.  He  felt  that,  if  he  were  once  crowned 
king,  the  magic  of  the  royal  name  would  have  its  effect.  It 
would  do  something  to  damp  the  spirit  of  resistance  in  the  still 
unsubdued  portions  of  the  country.  Men  who  were  eager  to 
fight  against  a  mere  foreign  invader,  would  be  less  inclined 
to  withstand  a  king  formally  chosen  and  consecrated  according  to 
the  laws  of  the  kingdom.  The  Duke  of  the  Normans  therefore 
signified  to  the  English  embassy  his  readiness  at  once  to  assume 
the  kingship  of  England.  The  day  for  the  consecration  of  the 
king-elect  was  of  course  fixed  for  the  great  Festival  of  the  Church 
which  was  drawing  near.  The  Midwinter  Feast  was  to  be  again 
held  at  Westminster  by  a  crowned  king.  On  the  Feast  of  the 
Nativity,  within  less  than  a  full  year  from  the  consecration  of  the 
minster  itself,  the  Church  of  Eadward  was  to  behold  another 
king  crowned  and  anointed  within  its  walls.  Events  had  indeed 
followed  fast  on  one  another  since  the  Christmas  Gemot  of  the 
last  year  had  been  held  by  the  last  king  of  the  House  of  Cerdic. 

§  4.   Preparations  for  the  Coronation 

The  Conqueror  was  thus  king-elect.     His  plans  had  answered. 
His  arts  and  his  arms  had  been  alike  successful.     And  the  triumph 


68  English  Historians 

of  his  subtlety  had  been  specially  his  own.  It  was  the  chance  shot 
of  an  arrow  which  had  overcome  the  English  king;  but  it  was 
William's  own  policy  which  had  overcome  the  English  people. 
King  in  truth  only  by  the  edge  of  the  sword,  he  had  so  managed 
matters  that  he  had  now  the  formal  right  to  call  himself  king,  not 
only  by  the  bequest  of  Eadward,  but  by  the  election  of  the  English 
people.  But  having  won  this  great  success  of  his  craft,  he  was  not 
inclined  to  jeopard  what  he  had  won  by  the  neglect  of  any  needful 
military  precaution.  He  did  not  trust  himself  in  London  till  his 
position  there  was  secured,  till  some  steps  had  been  taken  towards 
holding  the  lofty  spirit  of  the  citizens  in  check.  He  sent  on  a  de- 
tachment before  him  to  prepare  a  fortress  in  or  close  to  the  city. 
This  was  doubtless  one  of  those  hasty  structures  of  wood  of  which 
we  have  heard  at  Brionne  and  at  Arques ;  but  it  was  the  germ  which 
grew  into  the  noblest  work  of  Norman  military  art,  the  mighty 
Tower  of  Gundulf.  Orders  were  also  sent  to  make  everything 
ready  for  the  reception  of  the  new  king  and  for  the  great  ceremony 
of  his  inauguration. 

Of  William's  conduct  meanwhile  two  exactly  opposite  pictures 
are  given  us  by  the  Norman  and  by  the  English  writers.  His  pane- 
gyrist tells  us  that  all  was  quiet  and  peaceful;  as  there  were  no 
longer  any  human  foes  to  be  slaughtered,  William  could  carry  on 
his  favorite  warfare  with  the  denizens  of  the  air  and  of  the  forest. 
The  English  writers,  on  the  other  hand,  tell  us  how,  notwithstand- 
ing the  submission  of  his  new  subjects,  notwithstanding  his  own 
promises  to  them,  the  king-elect  still  allowed  his  soldiers  to  harry 
the  country  and  burn  the  towns.  There  is  probably  truth  in  both 
accounts.  William  had  no  longer  any  motive  for  systematic 
ravages,  such  as  he  had  been  guilty  of  before  and  after  the  battle. 
No  records  of  any  devastations  in  Hertfordshire  remain,  such  as  the 
records  which  we  have  seen  of  his  devastations  in  Sussex.  But  we 
have  seen  also,  from  what  happened  at  Dover,  how  hard  it  was  to 
control  men,  many  of  whom  doubtless  thought  that  whatever  was 
left  to  an  Englishman  was  something  taken  from  themselves.  We 
have  seen  also  that,  from  whatever  cause,  William,  though  he 
indemnified  the  sufferers,  failed  to  punish  the  criminals.  We  may 
believe  that  something  of  this  sort  took  place  now.  Systematic 
ravages,  carried  on  by  the  Duke's  order,  doubtless  stopped,  but 
the  excesses  of  the  army,  the  amount  of  burning  and  plundering 
done  without  his  order,  but  which  he  failed  to  check  or  to  punish, 
was  doubtless  considerable. 

From  Berkhampstead  to  London,  whatever  was  the  amount 


The  Coronation  of  William   the  Conqueror     69 

of  damage  done  by  the  way,  William  marched  on  without  oppo- 
sition. When  the  preparations  which  were  to  keep  the  city  in 
subjection  were  completed,  William  drew  near  in  readiness  for 
the  great  rite  which  was  to  change  the  Conqueror  into  a  king. 
As  to  the  place  of  the  ceremony,  there  can  be  no  doubt.  William 
was  to  be  crowned  in  the  church  which  had  been  reared  by  his 
kinsman  and  predecessor,  and  where  his  mortal  remains,  lifeless, 
yet  undecayed,  and  already  displaying  their  wonder-working 
powers,  lay  as  it  were  to  welcome  him.  William  was  thus  to  be 
consecrated  within  the  same  temple  where  Harold  had  been  con- 
secrated less  than  a  year  before.  He  was  to  be  consecrated  with 
the  same  rites  and  by  the  same  hand.  I  wish  we  could  believe, 
on  the  report  of  some  later  English  writers,  that  William  sought 
for  consecration  at  the  hands  of  Stigand,  and  that  the  high-souled 
primate  refused  to  pour  the  holy  unction  on  the  head  of  an  usurper 
and  a  man  of  blood.  But  had  William  offered  to  be  crowned  by 
Stigand,  he  would  indeed  have  fallen  away  from  his  character 
as  the  reformer  of  English  ecclesiastical  discipline.  The  act,  too, 
would  have  been  equivalent  to  giving  up  one  of  his  three  counts 
against  England;  it  would  have  been  an  acknowledgment  that 
Archbishop  Robert  had  been  lawfully  deposed.  The  scruple 
which  had  affected  even  the  mind  of  Harold  would  probably  be 
really  felt  by  William  with  ten  times  as  much  force ;  it  would  cer- 
tainly be  professed  by  him  with  ten  times  as  great  ostentation. 

The  special  favorite  and  champion  of  Rome  could  not,  in 
common  consistency,  ask  for  consecration  at  the  hands  of  a 
private  whom  Rome  had  declared  to  be  no  primate  at  all,  and 
who  had  no  pallium  save  that  which  he  had  received  from  an 
usurper  of  the  Holy  See.  Still  Stigand,  though  not  a  lawful  pri- 
mate, was  at  least  an  ordained  priest  and  a  consecrated  bishop; 
he  might  perhaps  even  be  recognized  as  the  lawful  occupant  of 
the  See  of  Winchester.  He  was  also  personally  the  first  man  in 
England,  to  whom  it  was  William's  policy  for  the  present  to  avoid 
giving  any  needless  offence.  He  was  therefore  allowed  to  take 
a  part  in  the  ceremony  second  only  to  that  of  the  actual  celebrant. 
But  the  sacramental  rite  itself  was  to  be  performed  by  the  hands 
of  Ealdred.  The  Northern  primate  was  the  only  canonical  met- 
ropolitan in  the  realm,  and  he  was  the  man  who,  as  having 
been  the  leader  of  the  embassy  at  Berkhampstead,  might  be 
looked  on  as  having  been  the  first  Englishman  to  take  a  formal 
part  in  making  William  king.  The  Primate  of  Northumberland 
had  thus  in  one  year  to  anoint  two  kings,  —  the  champion  of  Eng- 


yo  English  Historians 

land  and  her  Conqueror.  He  had  to  anoint  both  far  ;iway  from 
his  own  province,  and  to  anoint  both  at  a  time  when  he  could  in 
no  way  pledge  himself  that  the  willing  consent  of  his  province 
should  confirm  his  own  formal  act. 

§  5.    The  Coronation  of  William 

The  Christmas  morn  at  last  came;  and  once  more,  as  on 
the  day  of  the  Epiphany,  a  king-elect  entered  the  portals  of  the 
West  Minster  to  receive  his  crown.  But  now,  unlike  the  day  of 
the  Epiphany,  the  approach  to  the  church  was  kept  by  a  guard 
of  Norman  horsemen.  Otherwise  all  was  peaceful.  Within  the 
church  all  was  in  readiness;  a  new  crown,  rich  with  gems,  was 
ready  for  the  ceremony;  a  crowd  of  spectators  of  both  nations 
filled  the  minster.  The  great  procession  then  swept  on.  A 
crowd  of  clergy  bearing  crosses  marched  first;  then  followed  the 
bishops;  lastly,  surrounded  by  the  chief  men  of  his  own  land  and 
of  his  new  kingdom,  came  the  renowned  duke  himself,  with 
Ealdred  and  Stigand  on  either  side  of  him.  Amid  the  shouts  of 
the  people,  William  the  Conqueror  passed  on  to  the  royal  seat 
before  the  high  altar,  there  to  go  through  the  same  solemn  rites 
which  had  so  lately  been  gone  through  on  the  same  spot  by  his 
fallen  rival.  The  Te  Deum  which  had  been  sung  over  Harold 
was  now  again  sung  over  William.  And  now  again,  in  ancient 
form,  the  crowd  that  thronged  the  minster  was  asked  whether 
they  would  that  the  candidate  who  stood  before  them  should  be 
crowned  king  over  the  land.  But  now  a  new  thing,  unknown  to 
the  coronation  of  Eadward  or  of  Harold,  had  to  mark  the  corona- 
tion of  William.  A  king  was  to  be  crowned  who  spake  not  our 
ancient  tongue,  and  with  him  many  who  knew  not  the  speech  of 
England  stood  there  to  behold  the  rite.  It  was  therefore  not  enough 
for  Ealdred  to  demand  in  his  native  tongue  whether  the  assembled 
crowd  consented  to  the  consecration  of  the  duke  of  the  Normans. 
The  question  had  to  be  put  a  second  time  in  French  by  Geoffrey, 
Bishop  of  Coutances,  one  of  the  prelates  who  had  borne  his 
part  in  those  rites  in  the  camp  at  Hastings  which  had  ushered 
in  the  day  of  St.  Calixtus.  The  assent  of  the  assembled  multi- 
tude of  both  nations  was  given  in  ancient  form.  The  voices 
which  on  the  Epiphany  had  shouted  "Yea,  yea,  King  Harold," 
shouted  at  Christmas  with  equal  apparent  zeal,  "Yea,  yea,  King 
William."  Men's  hearts  had  not  changed,  but  they  had  learned, 
through  the  events  of  that  awful  year,  to  submit  as  cheerfully  as 


The  Coronation  of  William  the  Conqueror     71 

might  be  to  the  doom  which  could  not  be  escaped.  The  shout 
rang  loud  through  the  minster ;  it  reached  the  ears  of  the  Norman 
horsemen  who  kept  watch  round  the  building. 

They  had  doubtless  never  before  heard  the  mighty  voice  of  an 
assembled  people.  They  deemed,  or  professed  to  deem,  that  some 
evil  was  being  done  to  the  newly  chosen  sovereign.  Instead,  how- 
ever, of  rushing  in  to  his  help,  they  hastened,  with  the  strange  in- 
stinct of  their  nation,  to  set  fire  to  the  buildings  around  the  min- 
ster. At  once  all  was  confusion,  the  glare  was  seen,  the  noise  was 
heard,  within  the  walls  of  the  church.  Men  and  women  of  all 
ranks  rushed  forth  to  quench  the  flames  or  to  save  their  goods ; 
some,  it  is  said,  to  seek  for  their  chance  of  plunder  in  such  a  scene 
of  terror.  The  king-elect,  with  the  officiating  prelates  and  clergy 
and  the  monks  of  the  abbey,  alone  remained  before  the  altar. 
They  trembled,  and  perhaps  for  the  first  and  last  time  in  his 
life  William  trembled  also.  His  heart  had  never  failed  him 
either  in  council  or  in  battle ;  but  here  was  a  scene  the  like  of  which 
William  himself  was  not  prepared  to  brave.  But  the  rite  went  on ; 
the  trembling  duke  took  the  oaths  of  an  English  king,  —  the  oaths 
to  do  justice  and  mercy  to  all  within  his  realm, — and  a  special  oath, 
devised  seemingly  to  meet  the  case  of  a-  foreign  king,  —  an  oath 
that,  if  his  people  proved  loyal  to  him,  he  would  rule  them  as 
well  as  the  best  of  the  kings  who  had  gone  before  him.  The 
prayers  and  litanies  and  hymns  went  on;  the  rite,  hurried  and 
maimed  of  its  splendor,  lacked  nothing  of  sacramental  virtue  or  of 
ecclesiastical  significance.  All  was  done  in  order;  while  the  flames 
were  raging  around,  amid  the  uproar  and  shouts  which  surrounded 
the  holy  place,  Ealdred  could  still  nerve  himself  to  pour  the  holy 
oil  upon  the  royal  head,  to  place  the  rod  and  the  sceptre  in  the 
royal  hands.  In  the  presence  of  that  small  band  of  monks  and 
bishops  the  great  rite  was  brought  to  its  close,  and  the  royal  diadem 
with  all  its  gleaming  gems  rested  firmly  on  the  brow  of  \Villiam, 
king  of  the  English. 

The  work  of  the  Conquest  was  now  formally  completed;  the 
Conqueror  sat  in  the  royal  seat  of  England.  He  had  claimed  the 
crown  of  his  kinsman;  he  had  set  forth  his  claim  in  the  ears  of 
Europe ;  he  had  maintained  it  on  the  field  of  battle,  and  now  it  had 
been  formally  acknowledged  by  the  nation  over  which  he  sought 
to  rule.  As  far  as  words  and  outward  rites  went,  nothing  was  now 
wanting:  William  was  king,  chosen,  crowned,  and  anointed. 
But  how  far  he  still  was  from  being  in  truth  ruler  over  the  whole 
land,  the  tale  which  is  yet  in  store  will  set  before  us.  We  have 


72  English   Historians 

yet  to  see  how  gradually  William  won,  how  sternly  yet  how  wisely 
he  ruled,  the  land  which  he  had  conquered.  We  have  to  see 
how,  one  by  one,  the  native  chiefs  of  England  were  subdued, 
won  over,  or  cut  off,  and  how  the  highest  offices  and  the  richest 
lands  of  England  were  parted  out  among  strangers.  We  have  to 
see  the  Conqueror  in  all  his  might;  we  have  to  see  him,  too,  in 
those  later  and  gloomier  years,  when  home-bred  sorrows  gathered 
thickly  round  him,  and  when  victory  at  last  ceased  to  wait  upon 
his  banners.  At  last,  by  a  cycle  as  strange  as  any  in  the  whole 
range  of  history,  we  shall  follow  him  to  his  burial  as  we  have 
followed  him  to  his  crowning,  and  we  shall  see  the  body  of  the 
Conqueror  lowered  to  his  grave,  in  the  land  of  his  birth  and  in  the 
minster  of  his  own  rearing,  amid  a  scene  as  wild  and  awful  as 
that  of  the  day  which  witnessed  his  investiture  with  the  royalty  of 
England. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Adams,  A  Political  History  oj  England,  1066-12/6,  pp.  i-io.  Ramsay, 
Foundations  of  England,  Vol.  II,  chaps,  i-x.  Round,  Feudal  England,  for 
controversial  chapters  on  the  battle  of  Hastings. 


CHAPTER  H 

ANGLO-NORMAN    FEUDALISM 

As  a  result  of  the  Norman  Conquest,  the  old  English  land- 
lords —  earls  and  thegns  —  were  displaced,  and  the  lands  of 
England  with  the  peasants  dwelling  on  them  divided  out  among 
the  followers  of  William,  the  latter  quite  naturally  retaining  a 
large  share  for  himself.  In  addition  to  the  lands,  the  new  masters 
received  certain  governmental  powers  over  their  tenants,  such  as 
the  right  to  do  justice  and  punish  offenders.  The  terms  on  which 
the  lands  were  held  and  the  powers  which  the  lords  enjoyed  were 
destined  to  be  the  subject  of  innumerable  disputes  between  kings 
and  vassals  during  many  centuries,  for  the  kings  often  sought  to 
lay  enormous  burdens  on  the  lands  and  to  have  justice  administered 
by  their  own  officers,  especially  in  order  that  they  might  enjoy  the 
profits  arising  from  fines.  Sometimes  these  disputes  even  broke 
oat  into  civil  war,  and  sometimes  they  led  to  compromises  in  the 
form  of  documents  such  as  the  Great  Charter.  It  is  therefore  of 
fundamental  importance  that  the  student  should  examine  as  care- 
fully as  possible  the  conditions  on  which  these  lands  were  held. 

§  i.  Position  of  William  as  Conqueror  and  Sovereign1 

In  1066  the  Anglo-Saxon  commonwealth  was  suddenly  invaded 
by  a  war  band  of  Normans,  led  by  William,  Duke  of  Normandy. 
These  invaders,  originally  from  the  north,  had  in  the  previous 
century  settled  on  the  soil  of  France  and  adopted  the  French  lan- 
guage and  customs.  In  their  Norman  home  they  had  also  devel- 
oped under  Frankish  influences  a  military  and  administrative 
system  of  their  own,  and  after  their  conquest  of  England  they 

1  Adapted  from  Gneist,  History  of  the  English  Constitution,  chap.  viii. 
By  permission  of  G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons,  Publishers. 

73 


74  English  Historians 

naturally  carried  some  of  their  ideas  into  practice  so  far  as  was 
necessary  to  secure  their  position  as  the  dominant  class  under  the 
sovereignty  of  William  the  Conqueror. 

The  Duke  of  Normandy  was  recognized  as  king  of  England  by 
a  formally  summoned  National  Assembly.  The  old  controversy 
whether  William  the  Bastard  conquered  England  or  under  what 
other  title  he  acquired  control  of  the  country  may  be  considered 
as  decided  by  the  Conqueror  himself,  who  declared  that  he  had 
entered  upon  the  possession  of  the  country  as  the  designated 
testamentary  heir  and  legitimate  successor  of  King  Edward. 
This  was  the  only  manner  in  which  the  new  monarch  could  gain 
the  permanent  obedience  of  his  new  subjects  and  make  a  stand 
against  immoderate  pretensions  on  the  part  of  his  followers.  It 
was  therefore  not  the  tribe  of  the  Normans  but  Duke  William 
who  had  got  possession  of  the  country  with  a  title  from  the  pre- 
tended will  of  Edward,  with  the  consent  of  the  highest  authority 
in  the  Church,  and  with  the  consent  of  the  National  Assembly. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  as  well  as  of  right,  it  was  possible  to  treat  the 
country  in  this  way  as  a  personal  acquisition,  as  the  "Seigneury," 
"Dominion,"  terra  regis  Anglica,  terra  mea  —  a  designation  fre- 
quently found  in  the  records. 

The  mutual  relations  of  the  Saxons  and  the  Francigenae, 
however,  remained  hostile  for  many  generations.  The  conquered 
people  repaid  the  haughtiness  of  the  victors  by  attempts  at  rebel- 
lion; and  when  these  failed,  by  silent  animosity  towards  the  new 
lords  and  their  French  customs. 

§  2.   Organization  of  the  Military  System  and  Government  on  a 
,        Basis  of  Land  Tenure 

The  best  way  of  considering  the  Norman  settlement  is  therefore 
to  regard  it  as  a  permanent  military  occupation  which  (with  its 
numerous  fortifications  and  maintenance  of  a  paid  soldiery)  led 
to  a  thoroughly  new  military  organization.  But  this  change  also 
corresponded  to  the  actual  needs  of  the  country,  because  the 
Anglo-Saxon  commonwealth  had  fallen  through  internal  dissen- 
sion, a  defective  organization  of  its  military  array,  and  a  faulty 
distribution  of  the  military  burdens.  In  order  to  regain  the  lost 
unity  and  strength,  the  system  of  resting  military  service  upon 
popular  levies  and  personal  vassalage  had  to  be  abolished  and  the 
entire  landed  property,  so  far  as  it  had  to  bear  the  burdens  of  mili- 
tary charges,  took  the  form  of  property  held  on  condition  that  the 


Anglo-Norman   Feudalism  75 

specified  military  services  should  be  discharged.  This  marks  the 
period  of  the  feudal  system,  which  may  be  said  to  date  from  the 
time  when  the  feature  of  military  burdens  became  predominant 
in  landed  property,  and  the  grants,  to  which  the  character  of  pay- 
ment of  military  services  was  attached,  gave  the  warrior  a  perma- 
nently dependent  position.  England  is  the  only  state  in  which 
through  special  circumstances  there  was  possible  a  systematic 
application  of  this  principle  which  made  the  State,  represented  in 
the  person  of  the  king,  the  sole  proprietor,  hence  permitting  a  fresh 
redistribution  of  all  the  land  on  the  clear  basis  of  dependent  and 
derivative  tenure. 

It  was  the  position  taken  by  William  as  the  legitimate  successor 
to  King  Edward  which  settled  this  question  for  England.  In 
treating  as  rebels  King  Harold  and  those  who  fought  on  his  side, 
as  well  as  the  Saxons  who  afterwards  rebelled  or  opposed  William, 
a  legal  justification  was  found  for  a  general  confiscation  of  landed 
estates.  The  inheritance  of  Edward  and  the  possessions  of  the 
family  of  Harold  were  immediately  seized  as  royal  demesnes. 
By  virtue  of  grants  the  leaders  of  the  conquering  host  entered  into 
the  possessions  of  the  defeated  Saxons.  The  great  vassals  of  Will- 
iam could  either  immediately  furnish  their  own  contingents 
charged  upon  their  land  grants  or  do  so  by  subinfeudation,  by 
which  means  a  portion  of  the  Saxon  thegns,  who  had  not  been 
compromised  in  the  war,  could  remain  as  undervassals  upon  their 
old  estates.  In  a  like  manner  the  possessions  of  the  churches  and 
monasteries  were  retained  and  even  increased. 

The  object  that  the  royal  administration  now  pursued  for  a 
century  was  to  impose  on  the  whole  mass  of  new  and  old  possessors 
the  obligation  to  do  military  service  and  bear  the  burdens  of  the 
state.  The  unit  of  land,  known  as  the  knight's  fee,  on  which  a 
specific  obligation  rested,  tended  to  be  the  five-hide  holding  of 
the  Anglo-Saxon  period,  yet  with  a  stricter  rating  according  to 
the  value  of  the  product  of  the  particular  unit.  The  charge  rest- 
ing upon  this  military  land  unit  was  the  furnishing  at  royal  com- 
mand of  one  heavily-armed  horseman  for  forty  days'  service  in  the 
year  (seruitium  unius  mil  it  is).1 

The  exact  period  at  which  this  universal  systematization  took 
place  is  a  matter  of  controversy,  but  it  seems  highly  probable 
that  William  the  Conqueror  did  most  of  it  in  his  day.  Although  it 
is  an  error  to  regard  the  system  as  rigid  at  any  particular  time 

1  On  tenure  by  knight's  service  and  tenure  in  general,  see  Pollock  and 
Maitland,  History  oj  English  Law,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  II. 


76  English  Historians 

or  incapable  of  infinite  modifications  by  private  arrangements, 
there  are  certain  general  legal  incidents  marking  the  relations  of 
lord  and  vassal  in  this  complex  land-holding  system. 

§  3.    The  Legal  Incidents  of  the  Feudal  System 

1.  Conditional  H ereditability  0}  the  Grant.  —  According  to  Nor- 
man-French custom,  conditional  hereditability  has  been  regarded 
as  the  rule  also  in  Anglo-Norman  fiefs.     Yet  the  form  of  the  grant 
of  the  land,  dedi  et  concessi  tibi  et  heredibus  luis,  only  means  a  con- 
cession amounting  to  continuous  payment  for  military  service 
rendered.     The  enfeoffment  of  the  heir  only  took  place  condition- 
ally upon  his  being  a  man  capable  of  fighting,  and  that  of  the 
heiress  only  where  there  was  a  failure  of  males  and  in  order 
that  she  might  marry  a  warrior  acceptable  to  the  military  chief. 
Accordingly  it  was  natural  that  the  feoffee  could  neither  sell  nor 
mortgage  the  estate,  nor  make  it  a  security  for  his  debts,  nor  dispose 
of  it  by  will;  and  hence  followed  the  further  legal  incidents. 

2.  The  Rclevium,  Relief.  —  As  an  acknowledgment  that  the 
vassal  possessed  the  estate  on  condition  of  doing  military  service, 
a  certain  quantity  of  weapons  and  accoutrements  or  a  sum  of 
money  was  rendered  by  Norman  custom,  when  a  change  of  the 
person  bound  to  service  took  place.     Out  of  this  change  proceeded 
a  fixed  payment  in  recognition  of  the  conditional  tenure.     In  a 
certain  sense  the  prima  seisina,  primer-seizin,  is   in  addition  to 
this.     For  greater  security  the  king  as  lord  of  the  fee  could  take 
possession  of  the  estate  after  the  death  of  the  vassal  until  the  suc- 
cessor proved  his  title,  or,  where  necessary,  pleaded  and  obtained 
his  right  and  bound  himself  to  pay  the  rdevium.     According  to 
old  feudal  custom,  the  lord  could  in  this  way  claim  a  whole  year's 
income. 

3.  Feudal  Wardship  and  Marriage.  —  As  it  is  an  act  of  favor 
on  the  part  of  the  feudal  lord  to  give  the  fee  to  one  personally 
incapable  of  performing  military  service,  so  he  can  take  back  the 
estate  when  the  heir  is  a  minor,  exercise  in  person  or  through  a 
custos  the  rights  belonging  to  it,  and  continue  this  wardship,  en- 
joying the  profits,  until  the  completion  of  the  heir's  twenty-first 
year,  without  rendering  any  account.     As  tutor  legititnus  of  the 
ward's  person  he  might  also  give  the  heir  in  marriage'  when  the 
latter  had  arrived  at  a  proper  age  and  on  such  an  occasion  could 
exact  money  payments  —  a  custom  which  arose  under  circum- 
stances when  the  nearest  agnate  was  wont  to  drive  a  bargain  con- 


Anglo-Norman   Feudalism  77 

cerning  the  marriage  of  the  ward.  In  the  failure  of  sons,  the 
heiress  remained  under  this  profitable  wardship  until  her  majority, 
and  when  she  had  come  of  age  was  married  by  the  feudal  lord  to 
a  husband  who  now  became  the  real  feodary.  In  the  spirit  of  the 
old  wardship  the  marriage  of  the  female  ward  was  also  regarded 
as  a  money  business. 

4.  Aids,  Auxilia.  —  The  original  design  of  the  fief  as  a  means  of 
obtaining  service  for  the  lord  binds  the  vassal  to  an  extraordinary 
contribution  in  extraordinary  cases  of  honor  and  necessity,  notably 
to  ransom  the  lord  who  has  been  taken  prisoner,  to  endow  the 
lord's  eldest  daughter,  and  when  his  eldest  son  is  made  a  knight. 
These  three  cases  are  mentioned  in  the  Grand  Coutumier  and 
amongst  the  Normans  in  Naples  and  Sicily  as  the  customary 
ones,  but   do  not  absolutely  exclude  other   urgent   cases,    espe- 
cially  contributions   made    by   the   under   vassals   towards    the 
reliefs  and  aids  which  their  lord  pays  to  his  feudal  overlord  and 
for  the  payment  of  his  debts. 

5.  The  Escheat,  Forfeiture  of  the  Fief,  is  the  last  decisive  point 
in  which  the  conditional  value  of  the  grant  appears.  The  former 
takes  place  when  the  feudatory  dies  without  heirs  capable  of  suc- 
ceeding to  the  fief  —  a  case  that  must  frequently  have  occurred. 
Still  more  frequent  was  forfeiture  on  account  of  felony  which 
includes  almost  all  important  crimes,  regarding  them  from  the 
point  of  view  of  disobedience  towards  the  feudal  lord.  The  espe- 
cial harshness  of  the  feudal  law  adds  to  the  formal  attainder  on 
amount  of  "treason  and  felony,"  a  corruption  of  blood  or  disability 
of  the  descendants  to  succeed  to  the  inheritance. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Maitland,  Domesday  Book  and  Beyond,  pp.  150  ff.,  on  the  feudal  super- 
structure. Round,  Feudal  England,  pp.  225-314,  on  the  introduction  of 
knight's  service.  Adams,  A  Political  History  of  England,  1066-1216,  pp. 
10  ff. ;  Anglo-Saxon  Feudalism,  in  the  American  Historical  Review,  Octo- 
ber, 1901.  Pollock  and  Maitland,  History  of  English  Law,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  II, 
especially  for  tenure  and  the  conditions  of  service.  Vinogradoff,  The 
Growth  of  the  Manor,  Bk.  Ill,  on  the  feudal  period.  Stubbs,  Constitutional 
History  of  England,  Vol.  I,  chap,  ix;  Lectures  on  Early  English  History, 
chap.  ii. 


CHAPTER  in 

SORTS   AND   CONDITIONS   OF  MEN 

ONE  of  the  most  important  ways  in  which  feudal  society  differed 
from  modern  society  was  the  manner  in  which  the  privileges  and 
responsibilities  of  various  classes  of  persons  were  largely  determined 
by  birth  and  fixed  in  law.  While  it  is  an  undeniable  fact  that  the 
possession  of  wealth  gives  decided  advantages  at  law  to-day,  yet  so 
far  as  formal  principles  are  concerned,  neither  birth  nor  riches  has 
any  special  privileges.  It  is  a  grave  error,  however,  to  regard  the 
public  and  private  law  of  the  Middle  Ages  as  applying  indifferently 
to  all  inhabitants  of  the  country.  It  is  just  this  confusion  of  class 
rights  with  supposedly  "national"  rights,  this  identification  of  the 
class  with  the  nation,  which  has  led  to  so  many  grave  misconcep- 
tions about  the  "liberties  of  British  freemen."  The  position  of 
the  various  classes  within  and  before  the  mediaeval  law  is  fully  de- 
scribed in  the  section  of  Pollock  and  Maitland's  History  0}  English 
Law,  from  which  the  following  extract  on  three  important  classes 
is  taken. 

§  i.   The  Earls  and  Barons1 

Our  law  hardly  knows  anything  of  a  noble  or  of  a  gentle  class ; 
all  free  men  are  in  the  main  equal  before  the  law.  For  a  moment 
this  may  seem  strange.  A  conquered  country  is  hardly  the  place 
in  which  we  should  look  for  an  equality  which,  having  regard 
to  other  lands,  we  must  call  exceptional.  Yet  in  truth  it  is  the 
result  of  the  Conquest,  though  a  result  that  was  slowly  evolved. 
The  compiler  of  the  Leges  Henrici  would  willingly  have  given  us 
a  full  law  of  ranks  or  estates  of  men ;  but  the  materials  at  his  com- 

1  Pollock  and  Maitland,  History  of  English  Law,  2nd  edition,  Vol.  I,  pp. 
408  ff.     By  permission  of  Professor  Maitland  and  the  Cambridge  University 
Press. 

78 


Sorts  and  Conditions  of  Men     •  79 

mand  were  too  heterogeneous:  counts,  barons,  earls,  thegns, 
Norman  milites,  English  radknights,  vidames,  vavassors,  sokemen, 
villeins,  ceorls,  serfs,  two-hundred  men,  six-hundred  men  —  a 
text  writer  can  do  little  with  this  disorderly  mass.  But  a  strong 
king  can  do  with  it  what  he  pleases :  he  can  make  his  favor  the 
measure  of  nobility;  they  are  noble  whom  he  treats  as  such. 
And  he  does  not  choose  that  there  shall  be  much  nobility.  Gradu- 
ally a  small  noble  class  is  formed,  an  estate  of  temporal  lords,  of 
earls  and  barons.  The  principles  which  hold  it  together  are  far 
rather  land  tenure  and  the  king's  will  than  the  transmission  of 
noble  blood.  Its  members  have  political  privileges  which  are  the 
counterpart  of  political  duties ;  the  king  consults  them,  and  is  in 
some  sort  bound  to  consult  them,  and  they  are  bound  to  attend 
his  summons  and  give  him  counsel.  They  have  hardly  any  other 
privileges.  During  the  baron's  life  his  children  have  no  privileges ; 
on  his  death  only  the  new  baron  becomes  noble. 

The  privileges  of  the  earl  or  baron  are,  we  say,  extremely  few. 
Doubtless  from  of  old  every  free  man  was  entitled  to  be  judged  by 
his  peers :  that  is  to  say,  he  was  entitled  to  insist  that  those  who 
were  to  sit  as  his  judges  should  not  be  of  a  legal  rank  lower  than 
his  own.  Under  the  dominance  of  the  law  of  tenure  this  rule  would 
take  the  form  that  a  vassal  is  not  to  be  judged  by  subvassals. 
So  long  as  the  king's  court  was  a  court  of  tenants  in  chief,  any 
man  would  have  found  there  those  who  were  at  least  his  equals, 
and  even  in  a  county  court  there  would  have  been  barons  enough 
to  judge  any  baron.  As  the  administration  of  royal  justice  gradu- 
ally became  the  function  of  professional  lawyers,  the  cry  for  a 
judicium  parium  was  raised  by  the  nobles,  and  in  words  this  was 
conceded  to  them.  For  a  long  time,  however,  the  concession  had 
no  very  marked  effect,  because  the  court  held  coram  rege,  though  for 
everyday  purposes;  but  a  bench  of  professional  justices  might  at 
any  moment  assume  a  shape  to  which  no  baron  could  have  taken 
exception  —  even  a  Parliament  to  which  all  the  barons  had 
been  summoned  might  still  be  regarded  as  this  same  court  taking 
for  the  nonce  a  specially  solemn  form.  And  the  meaning  of  the 
rule  was  not  very  plain.  On  the  one  hand,  we  hear  the  assertion 
that  even  in  civil  suits  the  earl  or  baron  should  have  the  judgment 
of  his  peers ;  on  the  other  hand  Peter  des  Roches,  the  king's  minis- 
ter, can  say  that  the  king's  justices  are  the  peers  of  any  man,  and 
the  very  title  of  the  "barons"  of  the  exchequer  forbids  us  to  treat 
this  as  mere  insolence.  And  so  Bracton  gives  us  no  doctrine  as 
to  the  privilege  of  the  barons.  He  does  recognize  the  distinction 


80  English   Historians 

between  the  king's  court  of  "justices"  and  the  king's  court  of 
"peers,"  but  for  the  sake  of  a  quite  other  doctrine,  which  left  but 
few  traces  in  later  law.  When  there  is  a  charge  of  treason,  the  king 
himself  is  the  accuser,  and  life,  limb,  and  inheritance  are  at  stake; 
therefore  it  is  not  seemly  that  the  king,  either  in  person  or  by  his 
justices  who  represent  his  person,  should  be  judge;  so  Bracton 
throws  out  the  suggestion  that  the  cause  should  come  before  the 
"peers."  We  have  here  no  privilege  of  peerage,  but  a  special 
rule  for  all  cases  of  high  treason,  based  on  the  maxim  that  no  one 
should  be  judge  in  his  own  cause.  Under  the  Edwards  the  privi- 
lege of  peerage  was  gradually  ascertained,  as  the  court  of  law  held 
coram  rege,  which  by  this  time  was  known  as  the  King's  Bench, 
became  more  utterly  distinct  from  the  assembly  of  the  barons. 
But  in  the  end  the  baron  had  gained  very  little.  If  charged  with 
treason  or  felony,  he  was  tried  by  his  peers;  if  charged  with  a 
misdemeanor  (transgressio),  if  sued  in  a  civil  suit  by  high  or  low, 
if  the  king  challenged  his  choicest  franchises,  there  was  no  special 
court  for  him ;  he  had  to  abide  the  judgment  of  the  king's  justices. 
A  certain  freedom  from  arrest  in  civil  causes  we  may  perhaps  allow 
him;  but  in  Bracton's  age  arrest  in  civil  causes  was  as  yet  no 
common  event.  That  the  tenant  in  chief  could  not  be  excom- 
municated without  the  king's  leave,  was  a  privilege  of  the  king 
rather  than  of  the  baronage.  One  other  privilege  the  baron  had, 
but  it  was  of  questionable  value.  When  he  was  adjudged  to  be 
in  the  king's  mercy,  the  amount  of  the  amercement  was  fixed,  or 
"affeered,"  not  by  his  merely  "free  and  lawful"  neighbors,  but 
by  his  peers.  For  this  purpose,  however,  his  peers  were  found 
in  the  "barons "  of  the  exchequer,  and  these  experts  in  finance  were 
not  likely  to  spare  him.  There  are  a  few  little  rules  of  procedure 
which  distinguish  the  noble  from  the  non-noble.  Thus  we  are 
told  that  a  summons  to  court  should  allow  an  earl  one  month,  a 
baron  three  weeks,  a  free  man  a  fortnight ;  and  we  may  see  some 
traces  of  a  rule  which  exempts  a  baron  from  the  necessity  of 
swearing.  Even  the  members  of  the  king's  family  are  under  the 
ordinary  law,  though  in  their  "personal"  actions  they  have  the 
same  benefit  of  expeditious  procedure  that  is  enjoyed  by  merchants. 
Very  different  is  the  case  of  the  king,  who  in  all  litigation  "is 
prerogative." 

§  2.   The  Knights 

Below  the  barons  stand  the  knights;  the  law  honors  them  by 
subjecting  them  to  special  burdens;    but  still  knighthood  can 


Sorts  and  Conditions  of  Men  81 

hardly  be  accounted  a  legal  status.  In  the  administration  of  royal 
justice  there  is  a  great  deal  of  work  that  ^^  be  done  only  by 
knights^  at  aU— events  if  there- are  knights  to  be  had.  Four 
knights,  twelve  knights,  are  constantly  required  as  repre- 
sentatives of  the  county  court  or  as  recognitors.  For  some 
purposes  mere  free  and  lawful  men  will  serve -for  others,  knights 
ififcak  be  employed.  On  the  whole, ^fe  may  «£y  that  knights  &fe^^ 
required  for  the  more  solemn,  the  more  ancient,  the  more  decisive 
processes.  To  swear  to  a  question  of  possession,  free  and  lawful 
men  are  good  enough;  to  give  the  final  and  conclusive  verdict 
about  a  matter  of  right,  knights  are  needed.  They'stetreated  as 

an  able,  trustworthy  class ;  — bttt-we  noJnngpr  finH    any  cmrVi    rnlp 

as  that-tfee-oatrrof  one  thegn  is  equivalent  to  the~oatrr  of  shreeoris, 
In  administrative  law,  therefore,  the  knight  is  liable  to  some  special 
burdens ;  in  no  other  respect  does  he  differ  from  the  mere  free  man.   ( 
Even  military  service  and  scutage  have  become  matters  of  tenure  x 
rather  than  matters  of  rank,  and,  though  the  king  may*^n\'e^to 
force  into  knighthood  all  men  of  a  certain  degree  of  wealth,  we  have 
no  such  rule  as  that  none  but  a  knight  can  hold  a  knight's  fee, 
Still  less  have  we  any  such  rule  as  that  none  but  a  knight  or  none 
but  a  baron  can  keep  a  seignorial  court. 

§  3.    The  Unfree 

In  the  main,  then,  all  free  men  are  equal  before  the  law.  Just 
because  this  is  so  the  line  between  the  free  and  the  unfree  seems 
very  sharp.  And  the  line  between  freedom  and  unfreedom  is 
the  line  between  freedom  and  servitude.  Bracton  accepts  to  the 
full  the  Roman  dilemma:  Omnes  homines  aut  liberi  sunt  ant 
servi.  He  will  have  no  more  unfreedom,  no  semi-servile  class, 
no  merely  praedial  serfage,  nothing  equivalent  to  the  Roman 
colonatus.  All  men  are  either  free  or  serfs,  and  every  serf  is  as 
much  a  serf  as  any  other  serf.  We  use  the  word  serf,  not  the 
word  slave;  but  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  Bracton  had  not  got 
the  word  slave.  He  used  the  worst  word  that  he  had  got,  the 
word  which,  as  he  well  knew,  had  described  the  Roman  slave 
whom  his  owner  might  kill.  And  the  serf  has  a  dominus ;  we 
may  prefer  to  render  this  by  lord  and  not  by  master  or  owner, 
and  it  is  worthy  of  observation  that  mediaeval  Latin  cannot  express 
this  distinction ;  if  the  serf  has  a  dominus,  the  palatine  earl,  nay, 
the  king  of  England,  so  long  as  he  is  duke  of  Aquitaine,  has  a 
dominus  also,  and  this  is  somewhat  in  the  serf's  favor;  but  still 


82  English  Historians 

Bracton  uses  the  only  words  by  which  he  could  have  described  a 
slave  and  slave  owner.  True,  that  servus  is  neither  the  commonest 
nor  yet  the  most  technical  name  for  the  unfree  man ;  more  com- 
monly he  is  called  villanus  or  nativus,  and  these  are  the  words 
used  in  legal  pleadings;  but  for  Bracton  these  three  terms  are 
interchangeable,  and  though  efforts,  not  very  consistent  or  success- 
ful efforts,  might  be  made  te  distinguish  between  them,  and  some 
thought  it  wrong  to  call  the  villeins  serfs,  still  it  is  certain  that 
nativus  always  implied  personal  unfreedom,  that  villanus  did  the 
same  when  employed  by  lawyers,  and  that  Bracton  was  right  in 
saying  that  the  law  of  his  time  knew  no  degrees  of  personal  un- 
freedom. Even  in  common  practice  and  by  men  who  were  not 
jurists  the  word  servus  was  sometimes  used  as  an  equivalent  for 
nativus  or  villanus.  The  jurors  of  one  hundred  will  call  all  the 
unfree  people  servi,  while  in  the  next  hundred  they  will  be  I'iUani. 
In  French  villein  is  the  common  word ;  but  the  feminine  of  villein 
is  nieve  (nativa). 

There  are  no  degrees  of  personal  unfreedom ;  there  is  no  such 
thing  as  merely  praedial  serfage.  A  free  man  may  hold  in  villein- 
age ;  but  that  is  an  utterly  different  thing ;  he  is  in  no  sort  a  serf ; 
so  far  from  being  bound  to  the  soil  he  can  fling  up  his  tenement 
and  go  whithersoever  he  pleases.  In  later  centuries  certain  nice- 
ties of  pleading  gave  rise  to  the  terms  villein  in  gross  and 
villein  regardant  and  in  yet  later  times,  when  villeinage  of  any 
kind  was  obsolescent,  these  were  supposed  to  point  to  two  different 
classes  of  men, —  the  villein  regardant  being  inseverable  from  a 
particular  manor,  while  the  villein  in  gross  might  be  detached  from 
the  soil  and  sold  as  a  chattel.  The  law  of  Bracton's  time  recognizes 
no  such  distinction.  As  a  matter  of  fact  and  a  matter  of  custom, 
English  serfage  may  well  be  called  praedial.  In  the  first  place,  it 
rarely  if  ever  happens  that  the  serfs  are  employed  in  other  work 
than  agriculture  and  its  attendant  processes ;  their  function  is  to 
cultivate  their  lord's  demesne.  In  the  second  place,  the  serf  usu- 
ally holds  more  or  less  land,  at  least  a  cottage,  or  else  is  the  member 
of  a  household  whose  head  holds  land,  and  the  services  that  he 
does  to  his  lord  are  constantly  regarded  in  practice  as  the  return 
which  is  due  from  him  in  respect  of  his  tenement  or  even  as  the 
return  due  from  the  tenement  itself;  such  services  as  we  have 
already  seen  are  often  minutely  defined  by  custom.  In  the  third 
place,  his  lord  does  not  feed  or  clothe  him;  he  makes  his  own 
living  by  cultivating  his  villein  tenement  or,  in  case  he  is  but  a  cot- 
tager, by  earning  wages  at  the  hand  of  his  wealthier  neighbors. 


Sorts  and  Conditions  of  Men  83 

In  the  fourth  place,  he  is  seldom  severed  from  his  tenement;  he 
is  seldom  sold  as  a  chattel,  though  this  happens  now  and  again; 
he  passes  from  feoffor  to  feoffee,  from  ancestor  to  heir  as  annexed 
to  the  soil.  For  all  this,  the  law  as  administered  by  the  king's 
court  permits  his  lord  to  remove  him  from  the  tenement.  It 
could  hardly  have  done  otherwise,  for  he  held  in  villeinage,  and 
even  a  free  man  holding  in  villeinage  could  be  ejected  from  his 
tenement  whenever  the  lord  pleased  without  finding  a  remedy 
before  the  king's  justices.  But  as  to  the  serf,  not  only  could  he  be 
removed  from  one  tenement,  he  could  be  placed  in  another;  his 
lord  might  set  him  to  work  of  any  kind;  the  king's  court  would 
not  interfere ;  for  he  was  a  servus,  and  his  person  belonged  to  his 
lord;  "he  was  merely  the  chattel  of  his  lord  to  give  and  sell  at 
his  pleasure." 

But  whatever  terms  the  lawyers  may  use,  their  own  first  prin- 
ciples will  forbid  us  to  speak  of  the  English  "serf"  as  a  slave; 
their  own  first  principles,  we  say,  for  what  we  find  is  not  a  general 
law  of  slavery  humanely  mitigated  in  some  details,  but  a  concep- 
tion of  serfdom  which  at  many  points  comes  into  conflict  with 
our  notion  of  slavery.  In  his  treatment  of  the  subject  Bracton 
frequently  insists  on  the  relativity  of  serfdom.  Serfdom  with  him 
is  hardly  a  status ;  it  is  but  a  relation  between  two  persons,  serf  and 
lord.  As  regards  his  lord  the  serf  has,  at  least  as  a  rule,  no 
rights;  but  as  regards  other  persons  he  has  all  or  nearly  all  the 
rights  of  a  free  man ;  it  is  nothing  to  them  that  he  is  a  serf.  Now 
this  relative  serfdom  we  cannot  call  slavery.  As  regards  mankind  at 
large,  the  serf  so  far  from  being  a  mere  thing  is  a  free  man.  This 
seems  to  be  the  main  principle  of  the  law  of  Bracton's  day.  We 
must  now  examine  each  of  its  two  sides :  the  serf's  rightlessness 
as  regards  his  lord,  his  freedom  or  "  quasi-freedom "  as  regards 
men  in  general.  It  will  then  remain  to  speak  of  his  relation  to  the 
state. 

§  4.    The  Serf  in  Relation  to  his  Lord 

In  relation  to  his  lord,  the  general  rule  makes  him  rightless. 
Criminal  law  indeed  protects  him  in  l^e  and  limb.  Such  pro- 
tection, however,  need  not  be  regarded  as  an  exception  to  the  rule. 
Bracton  can  here  fall  back  upon  the  Institutes:  the  State  is 
concerned  to  see  that  no  man  shall  make  an  ill  use  of  his  property. 
Our  modern  statutes  which  prohibit  cruelty  to  animals  do  not  give 
rights  to  dogs  and  horses,  and,  though  it  is  certain  that  the  lord 


84  English   Historians 

could  be  punished  for  killing  or  maiming  his  villein,  it  is  not  certain 
that  the  villein  or  his  heir  could  set  the  law  in  motion  by  means  of 
an  "appeal."  The  protection  afforded  by  criminal  law  seems  to 
go  no  farther  than  the  preservation  of  life  and  limb.  The  lord 
may  beat  or  imprison  his  serf,  though  of  such  doings  we  do  not 
hear  very  much. 

As  against  his  lord,  the  serf  can  have  no  proprietary  rights.  If 
he  holds  in  villeinage  of  his  lord,  of  course  he  is  not  protected  in 
his  holding  by  the  king's  courts ;  but  then  this  want  of  protection 
we  need  not  regard  as  a  consequence  of  serfdom,  for,  were  he  a 
free  man,  he  still  would  be  unprotected;  and  then  just  as  the  free 
man  holding  in  villeinage  is  protected  by  custom  and  manorial 
courts,  so  the  serf  is  similarly  protected.  His  rightlessness  appears 
more  clearly  as  regards  his  chattels  and  any  land  that  he  may 
have  acquired  from  one  who  is  not  his  master.  As  regards  any 
movable  goods  that  he  has,  the  lord  may  take  these  to  himself.  We 
hear,  indeed,  hints  that  his  "  wainage,"  his  instruments  of  husbandry, 
are  protected  even  against  his  lord,  and  that  his  lord  can  be  guilty 
against  him  of  the  crime  of  robbery;  but  these  hints  are  either 
belated  or  premature;  the  lord  has  a  right  to  seize  his  chattels. 
But  it  is  a  right  to  seize  them  and  so  become  owner  of  them; 
until  seizure,  the  serf  is  their  owner,  and  others  can  deal  with  him 
as  such.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  we  hear  little  of  arbitrary  seizures, 
much  of  seizures  which  are  not  arbitrary  but  are  the  enforcement 
of  manorial  customs.  The  villeins  are  constantly  amerced  and 
distrained ;  the  lord  in  his  court  habitually  treats  them  as  owners 
of  chattels,  he  even  permits  them  to  make  wills,  and  when  they 
die  he  contents  himself  with  a  heriot.  So  here  again,  when  we 
look  at  the  facts,  the  serf's  condition  seems  better  described  as  un- 
protectedness  than  as  rightlessness,  though  doubtless  a  lord  may 
from  time  to  time  seize  goods  without  being  able  to  justify  the 
seizure  by  reference  to  custom.  Then,  if  the  serf  acquires  land 
from  some  third  person  to  hold  by  free  tenure,  he  whose  serf  he 
is  may  seize  it  and  hold  it ;  but  until  such  seizure  the  serf  is  tenant 
and  others  may  and  must  treat  him  as  such. 

And  then  we  find  that  all  this  rightlessness  or  unprotectedness 
exists  only  where  serfdom  exists  de  facto.  The  learning  of  seizin 
or  possession  and  the  rigid  prohibition  of  self-help  have  come  to  the 
aid  of  the  serfs.  Serfdom  and  liberty  are  treated  as  things  of  which 
there  may  be  possession,  legally  protected  possession.  A  fugitive 
serf  may  somewhat  easily  acquire  a  "seizin"  of  liberty.  When  he 
is  seized  of  liberty,  the  lord's  power  of  self-help  is  gone ;  he  can  no 


Sorts  and  Conditions  of  Men  85 

longer  capture  the  fugitive  without  a  writ;  he  can  no  longer  take 
any  lands  or  chattels  that  the  fugitive  may  have  acquired  since  his 
flight.  He  must  have  recourse  to  a  writ,  and  the  fugitive  will  have 
an  opportunity  of  asserting  that  by  rights  he  is  a  free  man,  and  of 
asserting  this  in  the  king's  court  before  justices  who  openly  profess 
a  leaning  in  favor  of  liberty.  We  need  not  suppose  that  this 
curious  extension  of  the  idea  of  possession  is  due  to  this  leaning; 
it  is  part  and  parcel  of  one  of  the  great  constructive  exploits  of 
mediaeval  law  —  relationships  which  exist  de  facto  are  to  be  pro- 
tected until  it  be  proved  that  they  do  not  exist  de  iure.  Still  the 
doctrine,  though  it  had  a  double  edge,  told  against  the  lords. 
Apparently  in  Bracton's  day  a  serf  who  fled  had  to  be  captured 
within  four  days;  otherwise  he  could  not  be  captured,  unless 
within  a  year  and  a  day  he  returned  to  "his  villein  nest " ;  a  parallel 
rule  gave  the  ejected  landholder  but  four  days  for  self-help.  Of 
course,  however,  every  absence  from  the  lord's  land  was  not  a 
flight ;  the  serf  might  be  living  elsewhere  and  making  some  periodic 
payment,  chevagium,  head-money,  in  recognition  of  his  lord's 
rights  ;  if  so,  he  was  not  in  seizin  of  his  liberty.  What  the  Insti- 
tutes say  about  domesticated  animals  can  be  regarded  as  to  the 
point. 

Yet  another  qualification  of  rightlessness  is  suggested.  More 
than  once  Bracton  comes  to  the  question  whether  the  lord  may 
not  be  bound  by  an  agreement,  or  covenant,  made  with  his  serf. 
He  is  inclined  to-  say  Yes.  His  reasoning  is  this :  the  lord  can . 
manumit  his  serf,  make  him  free  for  all  purposes ;  but  the  greater 
includes  the  less ;  therefore  the  serf  may  be  made  a  free  man  for  a 
single  purpose,  —  namely,  that  of  exacting  some  covenanted  benefit, 
and  yet  for  the  rest  may  remain  a  serf.  Such  reasoning  is  natural 
if  once  we  regard  serfdom  as  a  mere  relationship  between  two  per- 
sons. It  does  not,  however,  seem  to  have  prevailed  for  any  long 
time,  for  our  law  came  to  a  principle  which  was  both  more  easily 
defensible  and  more  hostile  to  serfdom,  —  namely,  that  if  the  lord 
makes  a  covenant  with  his  serf,  this  implies  a  manumission;  he 
becomes  free  because  his  lord  has  treated  him  as  free.  Bracton's 
doctrine  very  possibly  had  facts  behind  it  and  was  no  empty  specu- 
lation, for  we  do  find  lords  making  formal  agreements  with  their 
serfs;  but  it  ran  counter  to  a  main  current  of  English  land  law. 
The  agreements  that  Bracton  had  in  view  were  in  the  main  agree- 
ments relating  to  the  tenure  of  land,  and  as  we  have  already  seen, 
our  law  was  strongly  disinclined  to  recognize  any  contract  con- 
cerning the  occupation  of  land  which  was  merely  a  contract  and 


86  Knglish  Historians 

not  a  bestowal  of  "real"  rights;  it  urged  the  dilemma  —  no  right 
to  occupy  land  or  some  one  of  the  known  forms  of  legal  tenure. 

§  5.    Relation  of  the  Serf  to  Third  Persons 

The  serf's  position  in  relation  to  all  men  other  than  his  lord  is 
simple  —  he  is  to  be  treated  as  a  free  man.  When  the  lord  is  not 
concerned,  criminal  law  makes  no  difference  between  bond  and 
free,  and  apparently  the  free  man  may  have  to  do  ba'ttle  with  the 
bond.  A  blow  given  to  a  serf  is  a  wrong  to  the  serf.  It  may  also 
give  his  lord  a  cause  of  action  against  the  striker;  but  here  also  the 
law  makes  no  difference  between  bond  and  free.  If  my  serf  is 
assaulted  so  that  I  lose  his  services  or  so  that  I  suffer  contumely, 
I  have  an  action  for  damages;  but  it  would  be  no  otherwise  had 
the  assaulted  person  been  my  free  servant.  So  also  in  denning  the 
master's  liability  for  wrongful  acts  done  by  his  dependents,  the 
same  principles  as  regards  authorization  and  ratification  seem  to 
be  applied  whether  the  dependents  be  free  servants  or  serfs.  It 
is  rather  for  the  acts  of  members,  free  or  bond,  of  his  household 
(manupaslus,  mainpast),  that  a  man  can  be  held  liable  than  for 
the  acts  of  his  serfs. ' 

Then  in  relation  to  men  in  general,  the  serf  may  have  lands  and 
goods,  property  and  possession,  and  all  appropriate  remedies. 
Of  course  if  he  is  ejected  from  a  villein  tenement,  he  has  no  action; 
the  action  belongs  to  the  lord  6f  whom  he  hoWs  the  tenement, 
who  may  or  may  not  be  his  personal  lord;  were  he  a  free  man 
holding  in  villeinage,  he  would  be  no  better  off.  But  the  serf  can 
own  and  possess  chattels  and  hold  a  tenement  against  all  but  his 
lord.  This  general  proposition  may  require  some  qualifications 
or  explanations  in  particular  instances:  We  read  in  the  Dialogue 
on  the  Exchequer  that  if  the  lord  owes  scutage  to  the  crown,  his 
serf's  chattels  can  be  seized,  but  ought  not  to  be  seized  until  his 
own  chattels  have  been  exhausted.  We  read  in  Bracton  that  when  a 
lord  is  to  be  distrained  his  villein's  chattels  should  be  the  very  first 
object  of  attack;  but  in  these  cases  we  may  say  that  the  serf, 
having  no  proprietary  rights  against  his  lord,  is  treated  as  having 
none  against  those  who  by.  virtue  of  legal  process  are  enabled  to 
claim  what  the  lord  himself  could  seize  —  the  general  principle 
is  hardly  impaired  by  such  qualifications,  and  it  is  a  most  important 
principle. 

Still  it  is  not  a  natural  principle.  This  attempt  to  treat  a  man 
now  as  a  chattel  and  now  as  a  free  and  lawful  person,  or  rather 


Sorts  and  Conditions  of  Men  87 

to  treat  him  as  being  both  at  one  and  the  same  moment,  must  give 
rise  to  difficult  problems  such  as  no  law  of  true  slavery  can  ever 
have  to  meet.  Suppose,  for  example,  that  a  villein  makes  an  agree- 
ment with  one  who  is  not  his  lord ;  it  seems  certain  that  the  villein 
can  enforce  it ;  but  can  the  other  contractor  enforce  it  ?  To  this 
question  we  have  a  definite  answer  from  Britton,  —  a  contract 
cannot  be  enforced  against  a  villein;  if  he  is  sued  and  pleads 
"I  was  the  villein  of  X  when  this  agreement  was  made  and  all  that 
I  have  belongs  to  him,"  then  the  plaintiff,  unless  he  will  contradict 
this  plea,  must  fail  and  his  action  will  be  dismissed;  nor  can  he 
sue  X,  for  (unless  there  is  some  agency  in  the  case)  the  lord  is  not 
bound  by  his  serf's  contract.  In  later  times  this  rule  must  have 
been  altered;  the  plea,  "I  am  the  villein  of  X  and  hold  this  land 
of  him  in  villeinage,"  was  often  urged  in  action  for  land, 
but  we  do  not  find  the  plea,  "I  am  the  villein  of  X, "  set  up  in  purely 
"personal"  actions,  as  assuredly  it  would  have  been  had  it  been 
a  good  plea.  But,  even  if  we  admit  that  a  villein  may  be  sued  upon 
contract,  the  creditor's  remedy  is  precarious,  for  the  lord  can  seize 
all  the  lands  and  chattels  of  his  serf,  and  an  action  against  his  serf 
is  just  what  will  arouse  his  usually  dormant  right.  Thus  the  law, 
in  trying  to  work  out  its  curious  principle  of  "relative  servitude," 
is  driven  to  treat  the  serf  as  a  privileged  person,  as  one  who  can 
sue  but  not  be  sued  upon  a  contract  and,  even  when  it  allows  that 
he  can  be  sued,  it  can  give  the  creditor  but  a  poor  chance  of  getting 
paid  and  will  hardly  prevent  collusion  between  villeins  and  friendly 
lords.  Again,  we  see  the  ecclesiastical  courts  condemning  the 
villein  to  pay  money  for  his  sins,  fornication,  and  the  like,  and  then 
we  see  the  villein  getting  into  trouble  with  his  lord  for  having  thus 
expended  money  which  in  some  sort  was  his  lord's.  The  law 
with  its  idea  of  relative  servitude  seems  to  be  fighting  against  the 
very  nature  of  things  and  the  very  nature  of  persons. 

§  6.   Relation  of  the  Serf  to  the  State 

Lastly,  we  should  notice  the  serf's  position  in  public  law.  It 
is  highly  probable  that  a  serf  could  not  sit  as  the  judge  of  a  free 
man,  though  it  may  be  much  doubted  whether  this  rule  was  strictly 
observed  in  the  manorial  courts.  He  could  not  sit  as  a  judge  in 
the  communal  courts,  though  he  often  had  to  go  to  them  in  the 
humbler  capacity  of  a  "presenter."  So,  too, he  could  not  be  a  juror 
in  civil  causes ;  this  he  probably  regarded  as  a  blessed  exemption 
from  a  duty  which  fell  heavily  on  free  men.  But  in  criminal 


88  English   Historians 

and  in  fiscal  matters  he  had  to  make  presentments.  At  least  in 
the  earlier  part  of  the  century,  the  verdict  or  testimony  which  sends 
free  men  to  the  gallows  is  commonly  that  of  twelve  free  men  in- 
dorsed by  that  of  the  representatives  of  four  townships,  and  such 
representatives  were  very  often,  perhaps  normally,  born  villeins. 
Such  representatives  served  on  coroners'  inquests,  and  the  king 
took  their  testimony  when  he  wished  to  know  the  extent  of  the 
royal  rights.  In  the  "halimoots"  or  manorial  courts  the  serfs 
are  busy  as  presenters,  jurors,  affeerers  of  amercements,  if  not  as 
judges;  they  fill  the  manorial  offices;  the  reeve  of  the  township 
is  commonly  a  serf.  What  is  more,  the  State  in  its  exactions  pays 
little  heed  to  the  line  between  free  and  bond;  it  expects  all  men, 
not  merely  all  free  men,  to  have  arms;  so  soon  as  it  begins  to  levy 
taxes  on  movables,  the  serfs,  if  they  have  chattels  enough,  must 
pay  for  them.  It  is  but  a  small  set-off  for  all  this  onerous  freedom 
that  a  serf  cannot  be  produced  as  champion  or  as  compurgator; 
and  even  this  rule  is  made  to  operate  in  favor  of  liberty ;  if  a  lord 
produces  a  serf  as  champion  or  compurgator,  this  is  an  implied 
manumission.  The  serfs  have  to  bear  many  of  the  burdens  of 
liberty.  The  State  has  a  direct  claim  upon  their  bodies,  their 
goods,  their  time,  and  their  testimony,  and  if  for  a  moment  this 
seems  to  make  their  lot  the  less  tolerable,  it  prevents  our  thinking 
of  them  as  domestic  animals,  the  chattels  of  their  lords. 

§  7.  How  Men  Become  Serfs 

Having  seen  what  serfdom  means,  we  may  ask  how  men  become 
serfs.  The  answer  is  that  almost  always  the  serf  is  a  born  serf; 
nativus  and  villanus  were  commonly  used  as  interchangeable 
terms.  But  as  to  the  course  by  which  serfdom  is  transmitted 
from  parent  to  child,  we  find  more  doubts  than  we  might  have 
expected.  If  both  parents  are  serfs,  of  course  the  child  is  a  serf; 
but  if  one  parent  is  free  and  the  other  a  serf,  then  difficulties  seem 
to  arise.  The  writer  of  the  Leges  Henrici  holds  that  the  child 
follows  the  father;  but  he  quotes  the  proverb,  Vilnius  matris 
est  cuiuscunque  taurus  alluserit,  and  seems  to  admit  that  in 
practice  the  child  is  treated  as  a  serf  if  either  of  the  parents  is 
unfree.  Glanvill  is  clear  that  the  child  of  an  unfree  woman  is  a 
serf  and  seems  to  think  that  the  child  of  an  unfree  man  is  no  better 
off.  Thus  we  should  get  the  rule,  which  had  been  approved  by 
the  Church,  —  namely,  that,  whenever  free  and  servile  blood  are 
mixed,  the  servile  prevails.  Bracton,  however,  has  a  more  elabo- 


Sorts  and  Conditions  of  Men  89 

rate  scheme.  A  bastard  follows  the  mother ;  the  child  of  a  bond- 
woman, if  born  out  of  wedlock,  is  a  serf;  if  born  in  wedlock 
and  of  a  free  father,  then  another  distinction  must  be  taken ;  if  a 
free  man  takes  a  bondwoman  to  wife  and  they  dwell  in  her  villein 
tenement,  then  their  offspring  will  be  born  serfs ;  but  if  she  follows 
him  to  "a  free  couch,"  then  their  children  will  be  born  free.  So 
also  when  a  bondman  marries  a  free  woman,  the  character  of  the 
tenement  in  which  they  dwell  determines  the  character  of  the 
offspring.  The  influence  thus  ascribed  to  the  tenement  is  very 
curious;  it  shows  that  to  keep  villein  status  and  villein  tenure 
apart  was  in  practice  a  difficult  matter,  even  for  a  lawyer  ever 
ready  to  insist  that  in  theory  they  had  nothing  to  do  with  each 
other.  In  later  days  the  courts  seem  to  have  adopted  the  simple 
rule  that  the  condition  of  the  father  is  the  decisive  fact,  and  to 
have  pressed  this  rule  to  the  absurd,  if  humane,  conclusion  that  a 
bastard  is  always  born  free  since  he  has  no  father. 

"  Mixed  marriages, "  indeed,  gave  a  great  deal  of  trouble  through- 
out the  Middle  Ages  by  raising  questions  as  to  the  rights  and 
remedies  of  the  husband  and  wife.  Ultimately  "the  better  opinion 
of  our  books"  was  that  the  marriage  of  a  female  serf  with  a  free 
man,  other  than  her  lord,  did  not  absolutely  enfranchise  her,  but 
merely  made  her  free  during  the  marriage.  In  1302,  however,  we 
find  two  justices  denouncing  this  doctrine  as  false,  "and  worse 
than  false,  for  it  is  heresy";  apparently  they  think  that  such  a 
marriage  has  all  the  effect  of  a  manumission ;  but  their  opinion  did 
not  go  undisputed.  Such  a  marriage  would  not  at  any  rate  drag 
down  the  free  man  into  personal  servitude,  though  according  to 
Bracton  the  issue  of  it  would  be  serfs  if  they  were  born  in  the 
villein  tenement.  In  the  converse  case  in  which  a  bondman  marries 
a  free  woman,  he  of  course  is  not  enfranchised,  though  Bracton's 
doctrine  would  make  their  children  free  if  born  in  her  free  tene- 
ment. On  the  contrary,  it  might  be  thought  that,  at  all  events  if 
she  went  to  live  along  with  her  villein  husband  in  his  villein  tene- 
ment and  to  bear  him  villein  children,  she  herself  would  be  ac- 
counted a  villein.  But  this  was  not  the  rule.  How  far  during  the 
marriage  she  could  make  good  any  rights  against  her  husband's 
lord  (and  it  will  be  remembered  that  as  against  all  others  her 
husband  was  a  free  man)  was  very  doubtful;  she  could  not  sue 
without  her  husband,  and  if  he  joined  in  the  action,  the  lord  would 
say,  "You  are  my  villein."  But  on  her  husband's  death  she  would 
be  free  once  more,  or  rather  her  freedom  would  once  more  become 
apparent  and  operative. 


90  English  Historians 

Faint  traces  may  be  found  of  an  opinion  that  birth  in  a  certain 
district  or  a  certain  tenement  will  make  the  child  unfree,  or  as  the 
case  may  be,  free,  no  matter  the  condition  of  its  parents;  but, 
except  in  the  well-known  privilege  of  Kentish  soil,  it  seems  to  have 
found  no  legal  sanction. 

A  person  born  free  rarely  becomes  a  serf.  When  Bracton 
speaks  of  prisoners  of  war  being  held  as  slaves  and  of  a  freeman 
being  reduced  to  slavery  on  account  of  his  ingratitude,  this  is  but 
Romanesque  learning.  We  do  not  in  this  age  hear  of  servitude 
as  a  punishment,  though  the  Welsh  marchers  claim  the  right  of 
selling  criminals  as  slaves,  and  King  John  can  threaten  all  men 
with  slavery  if  they  do  not  take  arms  to  resist  an  invasion.  Nor  do 
we  any  longer  hear  of  free  men  selling  themselves  into  slavery. 
But  it  is  a  principle  of  law  that  if  a  person  has  once  confeSBed 
himself  the  serf  of  another  in  a  court  of  record,  he  can  never  there- 
after be  heard  to  contradict  this  assertion,  and  so  "confession" 
takes  its  place  beside  "birth"  as  one  of  the  origins  of  servility. 
There  are  abundant  cases  in  our  records  which  suggest  that  this 
talk  about  confession  is  not  idle;  a  defendant  sometimes  seeks  to 
evade  a  plaintiff's  demand  by  confessing  that  he  is  the  villein  of 
a  third  person,  and  thus,  even  in  the  later  Middle  Ages,  men  may 
sometimes  have  purchased  peace  and  protection  at  the  cost  of 
liberty. 

Whether  prolonged  serfdom  de  facto  will  generate  serfdom  de  iure, 
was  in  Edward  I's  day  a  moot  point.  Some  justices  laid  down  as  a 
maxim  that  no  prescription  can  ever  make  servile,  blood  that  once 
was  free.  Others  flatly  denied  this  rule,  and  apparently  held  that, 
if  from  father  to  son  a  succession  of  free  men  went  on  doing  villein 
services,  the  time  would  come  when  an  unfree  child  would  be  born 
to  a  free  father.  One  opinion  would  have  condemned  to  servi- 
tude the  fifth  generation  in  a  series  of  persons  performing  base 
services,  while  a  Scottish  law  book  mentions  the  fourth  generation, 
and  a  common  form  of  pleading  made  a  lord  assert  that  he  had 
been  seized  of  the  grandfather  and  great-great-grandfather  of  the 
man  whose  liberty  was  in  dispute.  Opinion  might  fluctuate  about 
this  question,  because  procedural  rules  prevented  it  from  being 
often  brought  to  a  decision.  The  general  rule  as  to  the  means  by 
which  free  or  servile  status  could  be  conclusively  proved  was  that 
it  must  be  proved  per  parentes.  If  the  burden  of  proof  lay  on  the 
person  whose  status  was  in  question,  he  had  to  produce  free  kins- 
men; if  it  lay  on  the  would-be  lord,  he  had  to  produce  kinsmen  of 
the  would-be  free  man  who  would  confess  themselves  serfs.  A  mere 


Sorts  and  Conditions  of  Men  91 

verdict  of  the  country  might  settle  the  question  provisionally  and, 
as  we  may  say,  for  possessory  purposes,  but  could  not  settle  it 
conclusively  except  as  against  one  who  had  voluntarily  submitted 
to  this  test.  The  burden  of  the  proof  is  thrown  on  one  side  or 
the  other  by  seizin ;  the  man  who  is  in  de  facto  enjoyment  of  liberty 
continues  to  be  free  until  his  servility  is  proved ;  the  man  who  is 
under  the  power  of  a  lord  must  remain  so  until  he  has  shown  his 
right  to  liberty.  On  the  whole,  the  procedural  rules  seem  favor- 
able to  freedom.  In  Bracton's  day  a  four  days'  flight  might  throw 
the  burden  of  proof  upon  the  lord,  and  he  would  have  to  make  out 
his  title,  not  by  the  testimony  of  free  and  lawful  neighbors,  who 
would  naturally  infer  serfdom  de  iure  from  serfdom  de  facto,  but  by 
the  testimony  of  the  fugitive's  own  kinsfolk  as  to  the  fugitive's 
pedigree,  and  they  must  confess  themselves  serfs  before  their 
testimony  can  be  of  any  avail.  On  the  other  hand,  if  a  man  has 
been  doing  villein  services,  he  may  as  a  matter  of  fact  easily  fall 
into  serfage,  unless  he  is  willing  to  run  from  hearth  and  home  and 
risk  all  upon  a  successful  flight  and  an  action  at  law.  If  for  gen- 
eration after  generation  his  stock  has  held  a  villein  tenement  and 
done  villein  services,  he  will  be  reckoned  a  villein,  that  is,  a  serf ; 
even  his  kinsfolk  will  not  dare  to  swear  that  he  is  free.  There  is 
no  form  of  service  so  distinctly  servile  that  it  must  needs  be  ascribed 
to  servile  status  and  not  to  villein  tenure ;  even  the  merchet,  which 
is  regarded  as  the  best  test,  may  sometimes  be  paid  ratione  tenementi 
and  not  ratione  persona;  but  a  prolonged  performance  of  villein 
services  must  put  a  family's  free  status  in  jeopardy.  That  this  is 
not  so  as  a  matter  of  law  seems  the  opinion  of  the  highest  authori- 
ties ;  but  the  fact  that  a  contrary  opinion  was  current  both  in  Eng- 
land and  in  Scotland  may  well  make  us  think  that  in  common  life 
there  had  been  a  close  connection  between  villein  tenure  and  villein 
status. 

§  8.    The  Manumission  of  Serfs 

And  now  as  to  the  manumission :  a  lord  can  easily  enfranchise 
his  serf.  He  can  do  so  expressly  by  charter  of  manumission; 
he  does  so  impliedly  by  a  grant  of  land  to  be  held  freely  by  the 
serf  and  his  heirs,  for  a  serf  can  have  no  heir  but  his  lord ;  he  does 
so  impliedly  by  certain  acts  which  treat  the  serf  as  free,  by  pro- 
ducing him  in  the  king's  court  as  his  champion  or  compurgator; 
it  is  becoming  dangerous  for  a  lord  to  make  any  written  agreement 
with  his  serf.  There  has  been  difficulty  as  to  a  direct  purchase  of 


92  English  Historians 

liberty.  If  the  serf  paid  money  to  the  lord  for  the  grant  of  freedom, 
the  lord  might,  it  would  seem,  revoke  the  grant  on  the  ground  that 
the  serf's  money  was  his  own  money.  This  technical  difficulty,  for 
perhaps  it  was  no  more,  was  evaded  by  the  intervention  of  a  third 
person  who  made  the  purchase  nominally  with  his  own  but  really 
with  the  serf's  money,  and  the  serf  having  been  sold  and  delivered 
(the  ownership  did  not  pass  until  delivery)  was  set  free  by  his  new 
owner. 

In  Bracton's  day  every  act  of  manumission  by  the  lord  seems  to 
have  conferred  full  and  perfect  freedom ;  the  freed  man  was  in  all 
respects  the  equal  of  the  free  born.  This  could  hardly  have  been 
otherwise  since,  as  we  have  seen,  serfdom  was  regarded  for  the 
more  part  as  a  mere  relation  between  two  persons.  Glanvill  seems 
to  have  held  a  different  opinion.  He  speaks  as  though  the  libera- 
tion would  make  the  serf  free  as  regards  his  former  lord,  but  leave 
him  a  serf  as  regards  all  other  men..  The  chief,  if  not  the  only, 
point  that  Glanvill  had  before  his  mind  when  he  wrote  this  seems 
to  have  been  that  the  free  villein  could  not  be  produced  as  champion 
or  compurgator.  It  is  possible,  also,  that  he  h  id  in  view  acts  of 
enfranchisement  which  were  merely  private  and  would  not  have 
denied  that  there  were  solemner  methods  by  which  absolute  free- 
dom could  be  conferred.  In  the  Leges  Henrici  the  man  who 
wishes  to  free  his  serf  must  do  so  in  public, "  in  a  church  or  a  market 
or  a  county  court  or  a  hundred  court,  openly  and  before  witnesses" ; 
lance  and  sword  are  bestowed  upon  the  new  free  man,  and  a  cere- 
mony is  enacted  which  shows  him  that  all  ways  lie  open  to  his 
feet.  Glanvill  may  have  required  some  such  public  act  if  perfect 
liberty  was  to  be  conferred ;  but  Bracton,  who  habitually  regards 
serfdom  as  a  mere  relationship,  sees  no  difficulty;  the  lord  by 
destroying  relationship  destroys  serfdom.  Here  we  seem  to  see 
a  modern  notion  of  relative  serfdom  growing  at  the  expense  of  an 
older  notion  of  true  slavery.  To  turn  a  thing  into  a  person  is  a 
feat  that  cannot  be  performed  without  the  aid  of  the  State ;  but  to 
make  free  as  against  yourself  one  who  is  already  free  as  against  all 
but  you,  this  you  can  easily  do,  for  it  is  hardly  a  matter  of  public 
law. 

The  serf  will  also  become  free  (i)  by  dwelling  for  a  year  and  a 
day  on  the  king's  demesne  or  in  a  privileged  town  —  this  is  an 
assertion  of  prerogative  right  which  peoples  the  king's  manors  and 
boroughs ;  (2)  by  being  knighted  —  knighthood  confers  but  a 
provisional  freedom,  for  the  knighted  serf  can  be  degraded  when  his 
servility  is  proved ;  (3)  by  entering  religion  or  receiving  holy  orders ; 


Sorts  and  Conditions  of  Men  93 

it  is  unlawful  to  ordain  a  serf  —  this  is  forbidden  by  canon  as  well 
as  by  temporal  law;  but  when  he  is  once  ordained,  he  is  free, 
though  his  serfdom  revives  if  he  resumes  a  secular  life.  The  lord's 
right  of  action  for  the  recovery  of  a  serf  was  subject  to  a  prescrip- 
tive term;  in  1236  the  year  1210  was  chosen  as  the  limit  and  this 
limit  was  not  altered  until  1275;  we  have  already  seen  that  his 
right  of  self-help  the  lord  lost  somewhat  easily,  though  less  easily 
as  time  went  on. 

Such,  briefly  stated,  is  the  English  law  of  villeinage  or  serfage 
in  the  thirteenth  century.  Its  central  idea,  that  of  the  relativity 
of  serfage,  is  strange.  It  looks  artificial :  that  is  to  say,  it  seems 
to  betray  the  handiwork  of  lawyers  who  have  forced  ancient  facts 
into  a  modern  theory.  Slavery  is  very  intelligible;  so  is  slavery 
tempered  by  humane  rules  which  will  forbid  an  owner  to  maltreat 
his  human  chattel ;  so  again  is  a  praxlial  serfage,  and  the  ancient 
laws  of  our  race  compel  us  to  admit  that  there  may  be  a  half-free 
class  —  men  who  are  neither  liberi  homines  nor  yet  servi;  but  a 
merely  relative  serfdom  is  a  juristic  curiosity.  In  defining  it  we 
have  ever  to  be  using  the  phrases,  "in  relation  to,"  "as  regards," 
"as  against"-  —  phrases  which  would  not  easily  occur  to  the  un- 
lettered, and  law  which  allows  my  serf  to  sue  any  free  man  but  me, 
even  to  sue  my  lord,  does  not  look  like  a  natural  expression  of  any 
of  those  deep-seated  sentiments  which  demand  that  divers  classes 
of  men  shall  be  kept  asunder.  Then  this  idea  of  relative  servitude 
has  to  be  further  qualified  before  it  will  square  with  facts  and  cus- 
toms and  current  notions  of  right  and  wrong.  When  a  lord 
allows  it  to  be  recorded  that  on  the  death  of  his  servile  tenant  he  is 
entitled  to  the  best  beast,  he  goes  very  far  toward  admitting  that  he 
is  not  entitled  to  seize  the  chattels  of  his  serf  without  good  cause. 
We  hesitate  before  we  describe  the  serf  as  rightless  even  as  against 
his  lord,  and,  if  we  infer  want  of  right  from  want  of  remedy,  we  feel 
that  we  may  be  doing  violence  to  the  thoughts  of  a  generation 
which  saw  little  difference  between  law  and  custom.  On  the 
whole,  looking  at  the  law  of  Bracton's  day,  we  might  guess  that 
here  as  elsewhere  the  king's  court  has  been  carrying  out  a  great 
work  of  simplification;  we  might  even  guess  that  its  "serf-villein," 
rightless  against  his  lord,  free  against  all  but  his  lord,  is  as  a  matter 
of  history  a  composite  person,  a  serf  and  a  villein  rolled  into  one. 

That  this  simplifying  process  greatly  improved  the  legal  position 
of  the  serf  can  hardly  be  doubted.  We  need  not  indeed  suppose 
that  the  theow  or  servus  of  earlier  times  had  been  subjected  to  a 
rigorously  consistent  conception  of  slavery.  Still  in  the  main  he 


94  English   Historians 

had  been  rightless,  a  chattel ;  and  we  may  be  sure  that  his  right- 
lessness  had  not  been  the  merely  relative  rightlessness  of  the  "serf- 
villein"  of  later  days,  free  against  all  but  his  lord.  Indeed,  we 
may  say  that  in  the  courts  of  the  twelfth  century  slavery  was  abol- 
ished. That,  on  the  other  hand,  the  villani  suffered  in  the  process, 
is  very  likely.  Certainly  they  suffered  in  name.  A  few  of  them, 
notably  those  on  the  king's  manors,  may  have  fallen  on  the  right 
side  of  the  Roman  dilemma,  ant  liberi  out  senri,  and  as  free 
men  holding  by  unfree  tenure  may  have  become  even  more  dis- 
tinctively free  than  they  were  before ;  but  most  of  them  fell  on  the 
wrong  side  :  they  got  a  bad  name  and  were  brought  within  the 
range  of  maxims  which  described  the  English  theow  or  the  Roman 
slave. 

Probably  we  ought  not  to  impute  to  the  lawyers  of  this  age  any 
conscious  desire  to  raise  the  serf  or  to  debase  the  villein.  The 
great  motive  force  which  directs  their  doings  in  this  as  in  other 
instances  is  a  desire  for  the  utmost  generality  and  simplicity. 
They  will  have  as  few  distinctions  as  possible.  All  rights  in  land 
can  be  expressed  by  the  formula  of  dependent  tenure ;  all  conceiv- 
able tenures  can  be  brought  under  some  half-dozen  heads;  so 
also  the  lines  which  have  divided  men  into  sorts  and  conditions 
may  with  advantage  be  obliterated,  save  one  great  line.  All  men 
are  free  or  serfs ;  all  free  men  are  equal ;  all  serfs  are  equal  —  no 
law  of  ranks  can  be  simpler  than  that.  In  this  instance  they  had 
Roman  law  to  help  them ;  but  even  that  was  not  simple  enough  for 
them ;  the  notion  of  coloni  who  are  the  serfs  of  a  tenement  rather 
than  of  a  person,  though  it  might  seem  to  have  so  many  points 
of  contact  with  the  facts  of  English  villeinage,  was  rejected  in  the 
name  of  simplicity.  They  will  carry  through  all  complexities 
a  maxim  of  their  own,  —  the  serf  is  his  lord's  chattel,  but  is  free 
against  all  but  his  lord.  They  reck  little  of  the  interests  of  any 
classes,  high  or  low ;  but  the  interests  of  the  State,  of  peace  and 
order  and  royal  justice,  are  ever  before  them. 

We  have  spoken  at  some  length  of  the  "  serf- villeins  "  of  the 
thirteenth  century,  for  they  formed  a  very  large  class.  For  several 
reasons  precise  calculations  are  impossible.  In  the  first  place, 
tenure  is  so  much  more  important  than  status,  at  least  so  much 
more  important  as  a  matter  of -manorial  economy,  that  the  "ex- 
tents" and  surveys  are  not  very  careful  to  separate  the  personally 
free  from  the  personally  unfree.  In  the  second  place,  it  is  highly 
probable  that  large  numbers  of  men  did  not  know  on  which  side 
of  the  legal  gulf  they  stood;  they  and  their  ancestors  had  been 


Sorts  and  Conditions  of  Men  95 

doing  services  that  were  accounted  villein,  paying  merchet,  and 
so  forth ;  but  this  was  not  conclusive,  and  if  they  escaped  from 
their  .lord  it  might  be  very  difficult  for  him  to  prove  them  his  "na- 
tives." On  the  other  hand,  while  they  remained  in  his  power,  they 
could  have  little  hope  of  proving  themselves  free,  and  if  they  fled 
they  left  their  all  behind  them.  In  the  third  place,  a  great  part 
of  our  information  comes  from  the  estates  of  the  wealthiest  abbeys, 
and  while  admitting  to  the  full  that  the  monks  had  no  wish  to  ill- 
treat  their  peasantry,  we  cannot  but  believe  that  of  all  lords  they 
were  the  most  active  and  most  far-sighted.  Lastly,  we  have  as 
yet  in  print  but  little  information  about  certain  counties  which 
we  have  reason  to  suppose  were  the  least  tainted  with  servitude, 
about  Kent  (already  in  Edward  I's  time  it  was  said  that  no  one 
could  be  born  a  villein  in  Kent),  about  Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  about 
the  Northumbrian  shires.  Still,  when  all  is  said,  there  remain 
the  Hundred  Rolls  for  the  counties  of  Bedford,  Buckingham,  Cam- 
bridge, Huntingdon,  and  Oxford,  and  no  one  can  read  them  without 
coming  to  the  conclusion  that  the  greater  half  of  the  rural  popula- 
tion is  unfree.  The  jurors  of  various  hundreds  may  tell  us  this  in 
different  ways;  but  very  commonly  by  some  name  such  as  nativi 
or  servi,  by  some  phrase  about  "ransom  of  flesh  and  blood  "  or 
the  like,  they  show  their  belief  that  taken  in  the  lump  those  peas- 
ants, who  are  not  freeholders  and  are  not  royal  sokemen,  are  not 
free  men. 

Occasionally  a  man  who  was  born  a  villein  might  find  a  grand 
career  open  to  him.  It  was  said  that  John's  trusty  captain,  Gerard 
de  Athee,  whose  name  is  handed  down  to  infamy  by  Magna  Carta, 
was  of  servile  birth;  in  1313  the  Bishop  of  Durham  manumitted  a 
scholar  of  Merton  who  was  already  a  "master";  in  1308  Simon 
of  Paris,  mercer  and  alderman,  who  had  been  sheriff  of  London, 
was  arrested  as  a  fugitive  villein,  after  being  required  to  serve  as 
reeve  of  his  native  manor. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Gneist,  History  of  the  English  Constitution,  chaps,  vi  and  xx.  Vinogra- 
doff,  The  Growth  of  the  Manor,  pp.  332  ff.  Stubbs,  Constitutional  History  of 
England,  Vol.  I,  chap,  xi,  §§  124,  132. 


CHAPTER   IV 

REFORMS  IN  CHURCH   AND   STATE  UNDER  HENRY  H 

THE  true  nature  of  feudalism,  in  its  logical  consequences,  was 
demonstrated  in  the  anarchy  of  Stephen's  reign,  and  when  Henry 
II  came  to  the  throne  he  found  sovereign  power  shared  by  many 
factions  and  interests  in  the  State.  The  Church  claimed  for  its 
courts  extensive  jurisdiction  over  laymen  and  clergy  in  matters 
which  we  now  regard  as  rightly  belonging  to  secular  powers. 
Furthermore,  under  the  Hildebrandine  ideas  on  the  exalted  powers 
of  the  Church,  the  latter  claimed  an  independence  from  secular 
authority,  which,  however  righteous  it  may  have  been,  was  re- 
garded by  the  king  as  wholly  incompatible  with  national  unity. 
In  addition  to  the  great  strength  of  the  Church,  there  were  the 
barons  who  enjoyed  within  their  respective  domains  almost  regal 
powers.  Finally  the  governmental  machinery  for  executing  the 
law,  maintaining  police  control,  and  administering  royal  justice 
had  fallen  so  badly  into  disorder  that  Henry  II  had  to  reorganize 
it  and  define  its  sphere  of  action  in  order  to  make  his  will  effective 
throughout  his  realm.  In  other  words,  the  ideal  towards  which  he 
was  working  was  the  subjection  of  all  men  and  all  institutions  to 
the  supremacy  of  the  secular  State  of  which  the  king  was  the  per- 
sonal embodiment.  In  this  work  he  met  the  stoutest  opposition 
in  the  mighty  champion  of  ttye  Church,  Thomas  Becket. 

§  i.    Thomas  Becket  as  an  Ecclesiastic1 

Thomas  Becket,  who  had  been  selected  by  Archbishop  Theobald 
as  the  fittest  adviser  of  the  young  king,  was  endowed  with  many 
brilliant  and  serviceable  gifts.  He  was  an  able  man  of  business, 

1  Stubbs,  Constitutional  History  of  England,  Vol.  I,  chap.  xii.  By  per- 
mission of  the  Delegates  of  the  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford. 

96 


Reforms  in  Church  and  State  under  Henry   II      97 

versatile,  politic ;  liberal  even  to  magnificence ;  well  skilled  in  the 
laws  of  England,  and  not  deficient  in  the  accomplishments  of  either 
clerk  or  knight.  His  singular  career  illustrates  at  once  the  state 
of  the  clergy  at  the  time  and  his  own  power  of  adapting  himself, 
apparently  with  a  good  conscience,  to  each  of  the  three  great 
schools  of  public  life  in  turn.  The  clergy  of  the  Norman  reigns 
may  be  arranged  under  three  classes :  there  is  the  man  of  the 
thoroughly  secular  type,  like  Roger  of  Salisbury,  a  minister  of 
state  and  a  statesman,  who  has  received  high  preferment  in  the 
Church  as  a  reward  for  official  service;  there  is  the  professional 
ecclesiastic,  like  Henry  of  Winchester,  who  looks  to  the  interests 
of  the  Church  primarily,  whose  public  course  is  dictated  by 
regard  for  clerical  objects,  who  aims  at  a  mediatorial  position  in 
the  conflicts  of  the  State,  and  who  has  close  relations  with  the  great 
ecclesiastical  centre  at  Rome ;  and  there  is,  thirdly  the  man  who, 
not  less  patriotic  than  the  first  and  not  less  ecclesiastical  than  the 
second,  acts  on  and  lives  up  to  higher  principles  of  action,  and 
seeks  first  and  last  what  seems  to  him  to  be  the  glory  of  God.  This 
last  class  is  represented  to  some  extent  by  Anselm;  it  is  not  nu- 
merous and  in  an  age  of  monastic  sanctity  and  pretension  is 
especially  exposed  to  the  intrusion  of  false  brethren,  such  as  the 
fanatic  who  is  ambitious  of  martyrdom,  or  the  hypocrite  who  will 
endure  the  risks  of  persecution,  provided  he  obtains  the  honor 
of  popularity.  Thomas  Becket  lived  through  all  three  phases,  and 
friends  and  enemies  to  the  present  day  debate  to  which  of  the 
two  divisions  of  the  last  class  his  life  and  death  assign  him.  His 
promotion  to  Canterbury  put  an  end  to  the  first  act  of  his  career. 
Until  then  he  had  been  the  chancellor,  the  lawyer,  judge,  finan- 
cier, captain,  and  secretary  of  state.  Now  he  became  the  primate, 
the  champion  of  the  clergy,  the  agent  or  patron  of  the  pope, 
whom  he  probably  had  persuaded  Henry  to  recognize ;  the  as- 
sertor  of  the  rights  of  his  Church  and  of  his  own  constitutional 
position  as  first  independent  adviser  of  the  crown.  The  date  at 
which  he  resigned  the  chancellorship  is  uncertain;  but  it  seems 
clear  that,  before  Henry's  return  from  France,  he  had  made  him- 
self enemies  among  his  former  associates  by  demanding  from  them 
restitution  of  estates  belonging  to  the  See  of  Canterbury  which,  as 
he  maintained,  they  held  unjustly,  and  by  otherwise  asserting  the 
temporal  claims  of  his  see.  Henry  was  no  doubt  hurt  by  the 
resignation  of  the  chancellor,  but  was  scarcely  prepared  to  find  his 
late  minister  placing  himself  in  an  attitude  of  opposition  which  had 
no  precedent  in  the  history  of  the  last  hundred  years.  Anselm's 


98  English  Historians 

quarrels  arose  from  spiritual  questions.    Those  of  Thomas  began 
on  a  purely  secular  point. 

§  2.    First  Dispute  between  Becket  and  the  King 

The  account  given  by  the  contemporary  writers  of  this  first  dis- 
pute is  very  obscure :  it  concerned,  however,  some  question  of  taxa- 
tion in  which  the  king  was  anxious  to  make  a  change  beneficial 
to  the  royal  revenue.  Every  hide  of  land,  we  are  told,  paid  to  the 
sheriff  two  shillings  annually,  in  consideration  of  his  services  in 
the  administration  and  defence  of  the  shire.  This  sum  the  king 
wished  to  have  enrolled  as  part  of  the  royal  revenue,  intending 
probably  to  reduce,  as  he  afterwards  did,  the  power  of  the  sheriffs, 
or  to  remunerate  them  from  some  other  fund.  A  tax  so  described 
bears  a  strong  resemblance  to  the  Danegeld,  which  was  an  impost 
of  two  shillings  on  the  hide,  and  was  collected  by  the  sheriffs,  being 
possibly  compounded  for  at  a  certain  rate,  and  paid  by  them  into 
the  Exchequer.  As  the  Danegeld  from  this  very  year  (i  163)  ceases 
to  appear  as  a  distinct  item  of  account  in  the  Pipe  Rolls,  it  is 
impossible  to  avoid  connecting  the  two  ideas,  even  if  we  may  not 
identify  them.  Whether  the  king's  object  in  making  this  propo- 
sition was  to  collect  the  Danegeld  in  its  full  amount,  putting  an 
end  to  the  nominal  assessment  which  had  been  long  in  use,  and  so 
depriving  the  sheriffs  of  such  profit  as  they  made  from  it,  or  whether 
he  had  some  other  end  in  view,  it  is  impossible  now  to  determine ; 
and  consequently  it  is  difficult  to  understand  the  position  taken  by 
the  archbishop.  "We  will  not,"  he  is  recorded  to  have  said,  "my 
lord  king,  saving  your  good  pleasure,  give  this  money  as  revenue ; 
but  if  the  sheriffs  and  servants  and  ministers  of  the  shires  will 
perform  their  duties  as  they  should,  and  maintain  and  defend  our 
dependents,  we  will  not  be  behindhand  in  contributing  to  their 
aid."  The  king  in  anger  answered,  "By  the  eyes  of  God,  it  shall 
be  given  as  revenue,  and  it  shall  be  entered  in  the  king's  accounts ; 
and  you  have  no  right  to  contradict;  no  man  wishes  to  oppress 
your  men  against  your  will."  Becket  replied,  "My  lord  king,  by 
the  reverence  of  the  eyes  by  which  you  have  sworn,  it  shall  not 
be  given  from  my  land,  and  from  the  rights  of  the  Church  not  a 
penny."  We  are  not  told  further  of  tHe  immediate  result ;  but  the 
king  and  his  minister  never  met  again  as  friends.  This  is,  how- 
ever the  details  may  be  understood,  the  first  case  of  any  opposition 
to  the  king's  will  in  the  matter  of  taxation  which  is  recorded  in  our 
national  history. 


Reforms  in  Church  and  State  under  Henry   II      99 


§  3.    The  Church-State  Quarrel 

Three  months  after  in  October,  in  the  Council  of  Westminstei^- 
a  fresh  constitutional  quarrel  broke  out.  Ever  since  the  Con- 
queror had  divided  the  temporal  and  spiritual  courts  of  justice, 
the  treatment  of  criminal  clerks  had  been  a  matter  of  difficulty; 
the  lay  tribunals  were  prevented  by  the  ecclesiastical  ones  from 
enforcing  justice,  and  the  ecclesiastical  ones  were  able  only  to  inflict 
spiritual  penalties.  The  reasonable  compromise  which  had  been 
propounded  by  the  Conqueror  himself,  in  the  injunction  that 
the  lay  officials  should  enforce  the  judgments  of  the  bishops,  had 
been  rendered  inefficacious  by  the  jealousies  of  the  two  estates;- 
and  the  result  was  that  in  many  cases  grossly  criminal  acts  of  clerks 
escaped  unpunished,  and  gross  criminals  eluded  the  penalty  of 
their  crimes  by  declaring  themselves  clerks.  The  fact  that  the 
king  took  up  the  question  at  this  moment  seems  to  show  that  he  was 
already  undertaking  the  reform  of  the  criminal  law  which  he  car- 
ried into  effect  three  years  after.  He  proposed  that  the  anoma- 
lous state  of  things  should  cease;  that  clerical  criminals  should 
be  brought  before  the  temporal  court  and  accused  there;  if  they 
pleaded  not  guilty,  they  were  to  be  tried  in  the  ecclesiastical  court; 
if  found  guilty,  to  be  degraded  there  and  brought  back  to  the  tem- 
poral court  for  punishment  as  laymen.  Becket  resisted;  it  was 
sufficient  that  the  criminal  should  be  degraded:  if  he  offended 
again,  he  offended  as  a  layman,  and  the  king  might  take  him; 
but  the  first  punishment  was  sufficient  for  the  first  offence.  The 
king  on  the  same  occasion  complained  heavily  of  the  exactions  of 
the  ecclesiastical  courts,  and  proposed  to  the  assembled  bishops 
that  they  should  promise  to  abide  by  the  customs  which  regulated 
those  courts  and  the  rights  of  the  clergy  generally,  as  they  had 
been  allowed  in  the  days  of  his  grandfather.  The  archbishop 
saw  that  to  concede  this  unreservedly  would  be  to  place  the  whole 
of  the  clergy  at  the  king's  mercy;  he  prevailed  on  the  bishops  to 
assent  "saving  their  order,"  and  the  king,  irritated  by  the  oppo- 
sition, left  the  assembly  in  anger.  Immediately  after  he  ordered 
the  archbishop  to  resign  the  honors  of  Eye  and  Berkhampstead, 
which  had  been  committed  to  him  as  chancellor. 

§  4.    The  Council  and  Constitutions  of  Clarendon 

After  two  or  three  unsatisfactory  interviews  with  Becket,  the 
king  called  together  at  Clarendon,  in  January,  1164,  the  whole  body 


ioo  English   Historians 

of  the  bishops  and  barons.  Again  the  archbishop  was  bidden  to 
accept  the  customs  in  use  under  Henry  I ;  and  again  he  declined 
doing  anything  unconditionally.  Then  the  king  ordered  that  they 
should  be  reduced  to  writing,  having  been  first  ascertained  by  rec- 
ognition. The  recognitors,  according  to  the  formal  record,  were 
the  archbishops,  bishops,  earls,  barons,  and  most  noble  and  ancient 
men  of  the  kingdom ;  according  to  the  archbishop,  Richard  de 
Lucy,  the  Justiciar  and  Jocelin  de  Bailleul,  a  French  lawyer  of 
whom  little  else  is  known,  were  the  real  authors  of  the  document, 
which  was  presented  as  the  result  of  the  inquiry,  and  which  has 
become  famous  under  the  name  of  the  "Constitutions  of  Claren- 
don." 

The  Constitutions  of  Clarendon  are  sixteen  in  number,  and  pur- 
port to  be,  as  the  history  of  their  production  shows  them  to  have 
been,  a  report  of  the  usages  of  Henry  I  on  the  disputed  points. 
They  concern  questions  of  advowson  and  presentation,  churches 
in  the  king's  gift,  the  trial  of  clerks,  the  security  to  be  taken  of  the 
excommunicated,  the  trial  of  laymen  for  spiritual  offences,  the 
excommunication  of  tenants-in-chief,  the  license  of  the  clergy 
to  go  abroad,  ecclesiastical  appeals,  which  are  not  to  go  farther 
than  the  archbishop  without  the  consent  of  the  king;  questions 
of  the  title  to  ecclesiastical  estates,  the  baronial  duties  of  the  prelates, 
the  election  to  bishoprics  and  abbacies,  the  right  of  the  king  to  the 
goods  of  felons  deposited  under  the  protection  of  the  Church,  and 
the  ordination  of  villeins.  Such  of  these  as  are  of  importance  to 
our  subject  may  be  noticed  elsewhere;  it  is  enough  at  present 
to  remark  that,  while  some  of  the  Constitutions  only  state  in  legal 
form  the  customs  which  had  been  adopted  by  the  Conqueror  and 
his  sons,  others  of  them  seem  to  be  developments  or  expansions 
of  such  customs,  in  forms  and  with  applications  that  belong  to  a 
much  more  advanced  state  of  the  law.  The  baronial  status  of 
the  bishops  is  unreservedly  asserted,  the  existence  of  the  curia 
regis  as  a  tribunal  of  regular  resort,  the  right  of  the  bishops  to 
sit  with  the  other  barons-  HMhe  curia  until  a  question  of  blood 
occurs,  the  use  of  juries  of  twelve  men  of  the  vicinity  for  criminal 
causes  and  for  recognition  of  claims  to  land,  all  these  are  stated 
in  such  a  way  as  to  show  that  the  jurisprudence  of  which  they  were 
a  part  was  known  to  the  country  at  large.  Accordingly,  the 
institution  of  the  Great  Assize  —  the  edict  by  which  the  king 
empowered  the  litigant  who  wished  to  avoid  the  trial  by  battle  to 
obtain  a  recognition  of  his  right  by  inquest  of  jury —  must  be  sup- 
posed to  have  been  issued  at  an  earlier  period  of  the  reign ;  and 


Reforms  in  Church  and  State  under   Henry   II    101 

the  use  of  the  jury  of  accusation,  which  is  mentioned  in  the  laws 
of  yEthelred  but  only  indistinctly  traceable  later,  must  have  been 
revived  before  the  year  1 164.  And  if  this  be  so,  the  Constitutions  of 
Clarendon  assume  a  character  which  the  party  statements  of  Becket's 
biographers  have  not  allowed  them.  They  are  no  mere  engine  of 
tyranny,  or  secular  spite  against  a  churchman :  they  are  really 
a  part  of  a  great  scheme  of  administrative  reform,  by  which  the 
debatable  ground  between  the  spiritual  and  temporal  powers  can 
be  brought  within  the  reach  of  common  justice,  and  the  lawless- 
ness arising  from  professional  jealousies  abolished.  That  they 
were  really  this,  and  not  an  occasional  weapon  of  controversy,  may 
be  further  inferred  from  the  rapidity  with  which  they  were  drawn 
up,  the  completeness  of  their  form,  and  the  fact  that  notwithstand- 
ing the  storm  that  followed,  they  formed  the  groundwork  of  the 
later  customary  practice  in  all  such  matters. 

To  Becket,  however,  and  his  followers  they  presented  themselves 
in  no  such  light.  The  archbishop  had  come  the  year  before  from 
the  Council  of  Tours  in  an  excited  state  of  mind,  of  which  the 
Council  of  Woodstock  saw  the  first  evidence.  He,  best  of  all  men, 
must  have  known  the  beneficial  effects  which  the  kingdom  at  large 
had  experienced  from  the  king's  legal  measures.  Yet  he  declared 
them  to  be  incompatible  with  the  freedom  of  the  clergy.  At  last, 
moved  by  the  entreaties  of  his  brethren,  whom  the  king's  threats 
had  frightened,  he  declared  his  acceptance  of  the  Constitutions; 
but  with  so  much  reluctance  and  with  so  many  circumstances  on 
which  no  consistent  testimony  is  attainable,  that  the  impression 
given  at  the  time  was  that  he  was  temporizing,  if  not  dealing  deceit- 
fully. He  sent  immediately  to  ask  the  forgiveness  of  the  pope,  as 
having  betrayed  the  interests  of  the  Church. 

§  5.    Despair  and  Flight  of  Becket 

From  this  moment  the  intrigues  of  the  archbishop's  enemies, 
intrigues  for  which  his  own  conduct  had  given  the  opportunity, 
although  it  afforded  no  justification,  left  him  no  rest.  In  vain  he 
appealed  to  the  king :  Henry  was  too  deeply  wounded  to  forgive, 
and  was  too  determined  on  his  own  policy  of  reform  to  think  of 
yielding;  and  the  courtiers  were  resolved  that  no  reconciliation 
should  take  place.  In  the  following  October  a  council  was  called 
at  Northampton,  to  which  the  archbishop  was  summoned,  not, 
as  was  the  custom,  by  the  first  summons  issued  specially  to  him 
as  the  first  counsellor  of  the  crown,  but  by  a  common  summons 


IO2  English   Historians 

addressed  to  the  sheriff  of  Kent  and  ordering  him  to  cite  the  arch- 
bishop to  answer  the  claims  of  John  the  Marshall.  At  that  council 
his  ruin  was  completed ;  he  was  overwhelmed  by  the  king's  demand 
that  he  should  produce  the  accounts  of  the  chancery,  and  by  the 
charges  of  his  enemies.  In  despair  of  justice,  in  fear  of  his  life, 
or  in  the  new  ambition  of  finishing  the  third  phase  of  his  career 
by  exile  or  martyrdom,  he  fled  from  Northampton  and  soon  after 
took  refuge  in  France  where,  partly  by  threats  of  spiritual  pun- 
ishment, partly  by  intrigues,  and  partly  by  invoking  the  legal  inter- 
ference of  a  pope  who  had  little  sympathy  with  his  sufferings,  he 
conducted  a  struggle  which  fills  the  chronicles  of  the  next  six  years. 
During  the  greatest  part  of  this  time  Henry  also  was  absent  from 
England.  He  paid  a  hurried  visit  to  Normandy  in  1165,  and  on 
his  return  made  his  third  expedition  to  Wales.  Early  in  1166  he 
held  a  council  of  the  clergy  at  Oxford,  and  a  great  assembly  of  the 
bishops  and  baronage  at  Clarendon.  He  had  just  negotiated  a 
marriage  for  his  eldest  daughter  with  Henry  the  Lion,  Duke  of 
Saxony,  who  was  now  in  close  alliance  with  Frederic  Barbarossa, 
and  was  supposed  to  be  intending  to  join  the  party  of  the  anti-pope. 
Harassed  by  the  attacks  of  Becket,  in  want  of  money  for  the  dowry 
of  his  daughter,  invited  by  the  emperor  to  join  the  schismatic  party, 
committed  to  it  by  his  own  envoys,  and  drawn  back  from  such  a 
gross  mistake  by  Earl  Robert  of  Leicester,  the  Justiciar,  who  refused 
the  kiss  of  peace  to  the  Archbishop  of  Cologne  when  acting  as  the 
imperial  ambassador,  Henry  showed  himself  still  the  master  of  the 
situation. 

§  6.    The  Assize  oj  Clarendon 

It  is  to  this  period  that  we  owe  the  Assize  of  Clarendon  which 
remodelled  the  provincial  administration  of  justice,  and  the  valu- 
able series  of  documents  which  are  contained  in  the  Black  Book 
of  the  Exchequer.  Immediately  after  the  Council  of  Clarendon  the 
king  went  to  France,  where  he  was  employed  in  the  acquisition 
of  Brittany  and  in  counteracting  the  intrigues  of  Becket  until 
March,  1170.  In  these  years  he  lost  some  of  his  oldest  coun- 
sellors: the  empress  in  1167,  Geoffrey  de  Mandeville  in  1166,  Earl 
Robert  of  Leicester  in  1 168,  and  Bishop  Nigel  of  Ely  in  1 169.  He 
had,  however,  now  gained  sufficient  experience  in  affairs  to  be  inde- 
pendent of  his  ministers :  he  never  again  submitted  to  the  advice 
of  a  friend  such  as  Becket  had  been ;  and  in  the  family  of  the  old 
ministers  of  the  Exchequer  he  found  a  number  of  trained  clerks 


Reforms  in  Church  and  State  under  Henry  II    103 

who,  without  aspiring  to  influential  places  in  the  government,  were 
skilful  and  experienced  in  every  department  of  ministerial  work. 
Bishop  Nigel  had  left  a  son  for  whom  he  had  purchased,  in  1159, 
the  office  of  treasurer,  Richard  Fitz-Neal,  the  author  of  the  Dia- 
logus  de  Scaccario,  afterwards  bishop  of  London.  Another  of  his 
clerks,  probably  a  kinsman,  earned  an  unhappy  notoriety  during 
the  Becket  quarrel  as  Richard  of  Ilchester;  he  was  a  man  of 
consummate  skill  in  diplomacy  as  well  as  finance,  acted  as  justiciar 
of  Normandy,  and  was  constantly  employed  as  a  justice  and  baron 
of  the  Exchequer  at  home.  The  office  of  chancellor  was  not  filled 
up  during  Becket's  life,  some  distinguished  chaplain  of  the  king 
usually  acting  as  protonotary,  vice-chancellor,  or  keeper  of  the 
seal.  The  office  of  justiciar  was  retained  by  Richard  de  Lucy, 
whose  fidelity  to  the  king,  notwithstanding  his  devotion  to  the 
memory  of  Becket,  and  his  frank  determination,  where  he  could, 
to  assert  the  rights  of  the  nation,  earned  him  the  honorable  title 
of  Richard  de  Lucy  the  Loyal. 

The  credit  of  having  drawn  up  the  Assize  of  Clarendon  must 
be  divided  between  the  king  and  his  advisers.  Whether  or  no 
it  owes  some  part  of  its  importance  to  the  loss  of  the  legal  enact- 
ments that  had  preceded  it,  it  is  the  most  important  document  of 
the  nature  of  law,  or  edict,  that  has  appeared  since  the  Conquest ; 
and,  whether  it  be  regarded  in  its  bearing  on  legal  history,  or  in  its 
ultimate  constitutional  results,  it  has  the  greatest  interest.  The 
council  in  which  it  was  passed  is  described  as  consisting  of  the  arch- 
bishops, bishops,  abbots,  earls,  and  barons  of  all  England ;  Becket, 
however,  was  not  present,  and  the  assembly  probably,  amongst 
its  minor  acts,  issued  some  sentence  against  him  and  his  relations. 
The  Assize  contains  no  mention  of  him.  It  is  arranged  in  twenty- 
two  articles,  which  were  furnished  to  the  judges  about  to  make  a 
general  provincial  visitation.  Of  these,  the  first  six  describe  the 
manner  in  which  the  presentment  of  criminals  to  the  courts  of  the 
justices  or  the  sheriff  is  henceforth  to  be  made.  Inquest  is  to  be 
held,  and  juries  of  twelve  men  of  the  hundred,  and  four  men  of  the 
township,  are  to  present  all  persons  accused  of  felony  by  public 
report ;  these  are  to  go  to  the  ordeal,  and  to  fare  as  that  test  may 
determine.  By  the  other  articles  all  men  are  directed  to  attend 
the  county  courts,  and  to  join,  if  required,  in  these  presentments; 
no  franchise  is  to  exclude  the  justices,  and  no  one  may  entertain 
a  stranger  for  whom  he  will  not  be  responsible  before  them;  an 
acknowledgment  made  before  the  hundred  court  cannot  be  with- 
drawn before  the  justices:  even  the  result  of  the  ordeal  is  not  to 


104  English   Historians 

save  from  banishment  the  man  of  bad  character  who  has  been 
presented  by  the  inquest;  one  sheriff  is  to  assist  another  in  the 
pursuit  and  capture  of  fugitives.  The  sessions  of  the  justices  are 
to  be  held  in  full  county  court.  Two  curious  articles  touching  the 
ecclesiastical  relations  of  the  State  follow;  no  convent  or  college 
is  to  receive  any  of  the  mean  people  into  its  body  without  good 
testimony  as  to  character,  and  the  heretics  condemned  at  the  recent 
Council  of  Oxford  are  to  be  treated  as  outlaws.  The  Assize  is  to 
hold  good  so  long  as  the  king  shall  please. 

In  this  document  we  may  observe  several  marks  of  the  per- 
manence of  the  old  common  law  of  the  country.  Not  only  is  the 
agency  of  the  shire-moot  and  hundred-moot  —  the  four  best  men 
of  the  township,  and  the  lord  with  his  steward  —  applied  to  the 
execution  of  the  edict,  but  the  very  language  of  the  ancient  laws 
touching  strangers  and  fugitive  felons  is  repeated.  The  inquest 
itself  may  be  native  or  Norman,  but  there  is  no  doubt  as  to  the 
character  of  the  machinery  by  which  it  is  to  be  transacted.  In  the 
article  which  directs  the  admission  of  the  justices  into  every  fran- 
chise may  be  detected  one  sign  of  the  anti-feudal  policy  which  the 
king  had  all  his  life  to  maintain. 

§  7.    Judicial  Visitations 

The  visitation  took  place  in  the  spring  and  summer  of  1166; 
two  justices,  the  Earl  of  Essex  and  Richard  de  Lucy,  travelled  over 
the  whole  country,  and  the  proceeds  of  their  investigations  swell 
the  accounts  of  the  Pipe  Roll  of  the  year  to  an  unusual  size.  The 
enormous  receipts  under  the  heads  of  placita,  the  chattels  of  those 
who  failed  in  the  ordeal,  fines  exacted  from  the  men  who  refused 
to  swear  under  the  king's  assize,  the  goods  of  those  hanged  under 
the  Assize  of  Clarendon,  the  expenses  of  the  jails  which  the  Assize 
ordered  to  be  built  or  to  be  put  in  good  repair,  mark  the  accounts 
of  this  and  several  succeeding  years.  These  entries,  which  have 
nothing  corresponding  with  them  in  the  rolls  of  the  earlier  years, 
seem  to  suggest  the  conclusion  that  the  act  from  which  they  re- 
sulted was  really  a  great  measure  of  innovation:  an  attempt  to 
invigorate  the  local  administration  of  justice,  and  the  initiative 
measure  of  a  newly  developed  principle  of  judicial  process,  a  dis- 
tinct step  forwards  in  the  policy  of  bringing  the  royal  jurisdiction 
into  close  connection  with  the  popular  courts,  and  thus  training 
the  nation  to  the  concentration  of  the  powers  of  the  people  in  the 
representative  Parliaments  of  later  ages. 


Reforms  in  Church  and  State  under  Henry  II    105 

The  immediate  results  of  the  Assize  were  by  no  means  transient ; 
the  visitation  of  1166  was  followed  by  an  itinerant  survey  of  the 
forests  in  1167,  and  in  1168  by  a  thorough  circuit  of  the  shires, 
held  by  the  barons  of  the  Exchequer  mainly  for  the  purpose  of 
collecting  the  aid  which  Henry  demanded  for  the  marriage  of  his 
eldest  daughter.  It  is  not  improbable  that  the  discussion  of  this 
aid  took  place  in  the  Council  of  Clarendon  in  1166,  for  Henry  was 
not  in  England  between  that  date  and  the  time  when  the  money 
was  collected ;  but  it  is  possible  that  it  was  taken  as  a  matter  of 
course  under  the  recognized  feudal- principles  in  such  cases.  The 
assessment  was  one  mark  on  the  knight's  fee;  and  the  number 
of  knights'  fees  on  which  it  was  assessed  was  certified  by  the  land- 
owners themselves.  The  collection  of  the  money  occupied  the 
barons  for  two  years,  and,  as  appears  from  the  action  of  the  next 
year,  did  not  satisfy  the  king,  whilst  it  called  forth  great  complaints 
on  the  part  of  the  people.  The  visitation  of  the  barons  was  used 
for  judicial  as  well  as  financial  purposes,  the  sheriffs  had  great 
opportunity  of  enforcing  justice  as  well  as  of  making  perquisites, 
and  the  exaction,  following  so  close  on  the  severe  assize  of  1166  led 
men  not  unreasonably  to  regard  the  mechanism  employed  for  the 
repression  of  crime  as  one  of  a  series  of  expedients  for  increas- 
ing the  receipts  of  the  Exchequer.  The  murmurs  of  the  people 
reached  the  king  in  Normandy;  and  he  had  by  this  time  other 
reasons  for  paying  a  visit  to  England. 

§  8.    The  Inquest  of  Sheriffs 

He  was  now  thoroughly  weary  of  the  Becket  controversy,  and 
the  pertinacious  underhand  hostility  of  Lewis  VII.  He  had  suc- 
ceeded in  compelling  the  Bretons  to  submit  to  Geoffrey,  his  third 
son,  whom  he  had  matried  to  the  heiress  of  Count  Conan;  and 
he  was  anxious  to  obtain  for  his  son  Henry  the  right  to  govern 
England  as  viceroy  or  sharer  in  the  rights  of  the  crown,  which 
could  be  conferred  only  by  the  rite  of  coronation.  With  this 
object  in  view  he  returned  in  March,  1170,  and  held  a  great  court 
at  Easter  at  Windsor,  and  another  immediately  after  at  London. 
In  the  second  assembly,  which  coincided  probably  with  the  Easter 
session  of  the  Exchequer,  he,  by  an  extraordinary  act  of  authority, 
removed  all  the  sheriffs  of  the  kingdom  from  their  offices,  and 
issued  a  commission  of  inquiry  into  their  receipts,  which  was  to 
report  to  him  on  the  i4th  of  June,  the  day  fixed  for  the  coronation 
of  the  younger  Henry.  The  commission  of  inquiry,  the  text  of 


106  English  Historians 

which  is  extant,  contains  thirteen  articles,  which  specify  both  the 
matters  to  be  investigated  and  the  particular  method  by  which 
the  information  is  to  be  obtained.  The  barons  to  whom  it  is 
intrusted  are  to  take  the  oaths  of  all  the  barons,  knights,  and  free- 
holders of  each  county,  and  to  receive  their  evidence  as  to  the 
receipts  of  the  sheriffs  and  the  whole  staff  of  their  servants,  of 
the  bishops  and  the  whole  host  of  their  temporal  officers,  of  all  the 
special  administrators  of  the  royal  demesne,  of  the  itinerant  officers 
of  the  Exchequer,  and  of  all  others  who  have  had  the  opportunity 
of  touching  the  public  money ;  in  particular,  inquiry  is  to  be  made 
into  the  execution  of  the  Assize  of  Clarendon,  whether  it  has  been 
justly  enforced,  and  whether  the  officers  employed  in  it  have  taken 
bribes  or  hush  money ;  into  the  collection  of  the  aid  pur  fille  marier, 
and  into  the  profits  of  the  forests;  a  supplementary  article  directs 
inquiry  into  the  cases  in  which  homage  due  to  the  king  and  his  son 
has  not  been  paid.  The  great  amount  of  business  which  thus 
accrued  could  not  be  despatched  in  so  short  a  time  by  the  same 
staff  of  officers;  the  inquest  was  taken  by  twelve  "barons  errant," 
clerk  and  lay,  in  the  counties  nearest  London,  and  by  similar  large 
commissions  in  the  more  distant  shires ;  they  were  probably  com- 
posed mainly  of  the  baronage  of  the  district,  who  would  naturally 
scrutinize  with  some  jealousy  the  proceedings  of  both  the  sheriffs 
and  the  judges.  The  result  was  apparently  the  acquittal  of  the  of- 
ficials ;  whether  or  no  this  was  obtained  by  purchase,  no  further  pro- 
ceedings were  taken  against  them,  but  the  sheriffs  were  not  restored 
to  their  sheriffdoms,  and  had  no  further  opportunity  given  them 
of  making  their  office  a  stepping-stone  to  greater  wealth  and  posi- 
tion. Henry  placed  in  the  vacant  magistracies  the  officers  of  the 
Exchequer  whom  he  knew  and  trusted,  adopting  in  this  respect 
the  plan  of  his  grandfather,  who  had  used  his  judges  for  sheriffs, 
although  he  avoided  throwing  too  many  of  the  counties  into  any 
single  hand ;  the  curia  regis  and  the  shire  thus  are  brought  closer 
together  than  ever,  whilst  a  blow  is  struck  at  the  local  influence 
of  the  feudal  lords. 

§  9.    The  Death  o]  Becket 

The  Whitsuntide  of  1170  was,  however,  marked  by  a  more  criti- 
cal event  than  the  inquest  of  sheriffs.  The  heir  was  crowned  as 
Henry  III ;  the  ceremony  was  performed  not  by  Thomas  of  Canter- 
bury, but  by  Roger  of  York,  and  the  wife  of  the  young  king  was  not 
crowned  with  him.  This  act,  which  was  intended  by  Henry  as  a 


Reforms  in  Church  and  State  under  Henry  II    107 

sign  and  seal  of  power,  was  a  most  unfortunate  mistake.  He  had, 
not  unnaturally,  supposed  that  it  would  strengthen  the  supreme 
authority  to  have  in  each  division  of  his  dominions  a  sufficient 
representative  of  royal  majesty ;  he  found  that  he  had  placed  a 
dangerous  weapon  in  the  hands  of  an  undutiful  son.  The  minor 
irregularities  of  the  coronation  day  roused  his  enemies  to  frenzy; 
Thomas  Becket  asserted  that  the  rights  of  Canterbury,  of  the  Eng- 
lish Church,  of  Christianity  itself,  were  outraged  by  Archbishop 
Roger's  intrusion;  and  Lewis  VII,  hurt  at  the  neglect  of  his 
daughter,  and  backed  by  the  support  of  the  family  of  Champagne, 
who  combined  careful  orthodoxy  with  intense  hatred  of  the  house 
of  Anjou,  urged  the  pope  to  put  the  kingdom  under  interdict. 
Before  these  invitations  took  effect,  Henry,  alarmed  as  he  might 
well  be,  hastened  into  France,  reconciled  his  long  quarrel  with  the 
archbishop,  and  authorized  his  return.  Becket  returned  in  Decem- 
ber, excommunicated  the  opposing  bishops,  provoked  the  king  to 
utter  his  angry  and  hasty  wish  to  be  rid  of  him,  and  expiated  his 
imprudent  and  unchristian  violence  by  a  cruel  death,  on  the  2gth 
of  December,  1170. 

He  was  at  once  hailed  as  a  martyr  by  Lewis  VII  and  the  house 
of  Champagne ;  the  monks  of  Canterbury  were  ready  to  accept  him 
as  their  patron  saint  after  death,  although  they  had  cared  little 
about  him  during  his  life;  the  tide  of  miracle  began  to  flow  im- 
mediately, and  with  it  the  tide  of  treason  and  disaffection  around 
the  person  of  the  king. 

Henry's  anger  and  horror  at  the  murder  of  the  archbishop  —  an 
act  which  showed  in  its  perpetrators  not  only  great  brutality,  but 
a  profound  disregard  for  the  king's  reputation  and  for  the  public 
safety  —  urged  him  to  apply  at  once  in  self-defence  to  Rome. 
That  done,  he  must  keep  out  of  the  way  of  the  hostile  legation 
which  had  been  despatched  to  Normandy.  He  collected  his  forces 
in  the  duchy,  crossed  to  England  in  August,  1171,  and  thence  to 
Ireland,  where  he  remained,  receiving  the  homages  of  the  bishops 
and  princes  of  that  divided  country,  until  he  heard  that  the  legates 
who  were  sent  to  absolve  him  had  arrived  in  Normandy.  This 
was  in  March,  1172.  On  receiving  the  news  he  returned  as  rapidly 
as  he  had  come,  made  his  submission  to  the  papal  representatives, 
clearing  himself  by  oath  of  all  complicity  in  the  death  of  Becket, 
renouncing  the  Constitutions  of  Clarendon,  and  swearing  adhesion 
to  Alexander  III  against  the  anti-pope.  The  submission  was 
completed  at  Avranches  in  September.  As  one  portion  of  the 
pacification,  the  younger  Henry  was  crowned  a  second  time,  on 


io8  English  Historians 

this  occasion  in  company  with  his  wife,  at  Winchester  instead  of 
Westminster,  and  by  the  Archbishop  of  Rouen  instead  of  the 
Archbishop  of  York.  The  long  storm  seemed  to  have  ended  in 
a  profound  calm.  .  .  . 

§  10.    Henry  II  as  King  and  Administrator 

The  examination  of  the  administrative  measures  of  Henry  in 
the  order  of  their  adoption  is  necessary  to  enable  us  to  realize  at 
once  the  development  of  his  policy,  and  the  condition  of  affairs 
which  compelled  it.  Nor,  although  in  the  investigation  much  de- 
tail is  needed  which  at  first  sight  seems  irrelevant  to  the  later  or  to 
the  more  essential  history  of  the  Constitution,  is  the  minute  inquiry 
to  be  set  aside  as  superfluous.  Henry  II  was,  it  is  true,  far  more 
than  an  inventor  of  legal  forms  or  of  the  machinery  of  taxation. 
He  was  one  of  the  greatest  politicians  of  his  time ;  a  man  of  such 
wide  influence,  great  estates,  and  numerous  connections,  that  the 
whole  of  the  foreign  relations  of  England  during  the  Middle  Ages 
may  be  traced  directly  and  distinctly  to  the  results  of  his  alliances 
and  his  enmities.  He  was  regarded  by  the  Emperor  Frederick, 
by  the  kings  of  Spain  and  Sicily,  by  the  rising  republics  of  Lom- 
bardy,  by  the  half-savage  dynasts  of  Norway,  and  by  the  fainting 
realm  of  Palestine,  as  a  friend  and  a  patron  to  be  secured  at  any 
cost.  He  refused  the  crowns  of  Jerusalem  and  Sicily ;  he  refused 
to  recognize  the  anti-pope  at  a  moment  when  the  whole  influence  of 
the  papacy  was  being  employed  to  embarrass  and  distress  him. 
His  career  is  full  of  romantic  episodes,  and  of  really  great  physical 
exploits. 

Yet  the  consent  of  the  historians  of  the  time  makes  him,  first 
and  foremost,  a  legislator  and  administrator.  Ralph  Niger,  his 
enemy,  tells  how  year  after  year  he  wore  out  men's  patience  with 
his  annual  assizes;  how  he  set  up  an  upstart  nobility;  how  he 
abolished  the  ancient  laws,  set  aside  charters,  overthrew  munici- 
palities, thirsted  for  gold,  overwhelmed  all  society  with  his  scutages, 
his  recognitions,  and  such  like.  Ralph  de  Diceto  explains  how 
necessary  a  constant  adaptation  and  readjustment  of  means  was  to 
secure  in  any  degree  the  pure  administration  of  justice,  and  lauds 
the  promptness  with  which  he  discarded  unsatisfactory  measures 
to  make  way  for  new  experiments.  William  of  Newburgh  and 
Peter  of  Blois  praise  him  for  the  very  measures  that  Ralph  Niger 
condemns;  his  exactions  were  far  less  than  those  of  his  successors; 
he  was  most  careful  of  the  public  peace ;  he  bore  the  sword  for  the 


Reforms  in  Church  and  State  under  Henry  II    109 

punishment  of  evil-doers,  but  to  the  peace  of  the  good ;  he  con- 
served the  rights  and  liberties  of  the  Church ;  he  never  imposed 
any  heavy  tax  on  either  England  or  his  continental  estates,  or 
grieved  the  Church  with  undue  exactions;  his  legal  activity  was 
especially  meritorious  after  the  storm  of  anarchy  which  preceded. 
In  every  description  of  his  character  the  same  features  recur, 
whether  as  matters  of  laudation  or  of  abuse. 

The  question  already  asked  recurs,  How  many  of  the  innovating 
expedients  of  his  policy  were  his  own  ?  Some  parts  of  it  bear  a 
startling  resemblance  to  the  legislation  of  the  Frank  emperors,  his 
institution  of  scutage,  his  assize  of  arms,  his  inquest  of  sheriffs,  the 
whole  machinery  of  the  jury  which  he  developed  and  adapted  to  so 
many  different  sorts  of  business  —  almost  all  that  is  distinctive 
of  his  genius  is  formed  upon  Karolingian  models,  the  very  existence 
of  which  within  the  circle  of  his  studies  or  of  his  experience  we  are 
at  a  loss  to  account  for.  It  is  probable  that  international  studies 
in  the  universities  had  attained  already  an  important  place ;  that 
the  revived  study  of  the  Roman  law  had  invited  men  to  the  more 
comprehensive  examination  of  neighboring  jurisprudence.  But 
whilst  the  Roman  law  met  with  a  cold  reception  in  England,  and 
whilst  the  minutiae  of  feudal  legislation  as  it  was  then  growing  up 
gained  admission  only  at  a  later  period,  and  were  under  Henry 
repressed  rather  than  encouraged,  we  here  and  there  come  across 
glimpses  of  the  imperial  system  which  had  died  out  on  the  soil 
from  which  it  sprang. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL   NOTE 

Stubbs,  Historical  Introductions  to  the  Rolls  Series.  Maitland,  Canon  Law 
in  England,  pp.  132  ff.,  on  Henry  II  and  the  clergy.  Stephens,  History  oj 
the  English  Church,  1066-1272,  for  Henry  and  the  Church.  /^Mrs.  John 
Richard  Green,  Henry  II.  Kate  Norgate,  England  under  the  Angevin  Kings. 
Ramsay,  The  Angevin  Empire.  ^Axfams,  Political  History  oj  England,  1066- 
1216,  chaps,  xiii-xv.  For  the  condition  of  the  realm  on  the  accession  of 
Henry  II,  Round,  Geoffrey  de  Mandevitte.  The  important  documents  are 
to  be  found  in  Adams  and  Stephens,  Select  Documents  oj  English  Constitu- 
tional History. 


CHAPTER   V 

THE  TRUE  NATURE  OF   MAGNA   CARTA 

No  document  in  the  history  of  institutions  is  more  famous  than 
Magna.-C.arta.  Generation  after  generation  of  Englishmen  looked 
back  upon  it  as  the  fountain  of  their  liberties  and  read  into  its 
general  clauses  the  authority  for  new  claims  and  privileges  which 
rose  from  time  to  time.  As  a  result  of  this  re-reading  of  the  Charter 
in  the  light  of  the  interests  of  succeeding  ages,  there  grew  up  around 
it  a  mass  of  tradition  that  obscured  its  original  meaning.  It  is 
comparatively  recently  that  scholars  have  begun  to  recognize  that 
the  document  must  be  studied,  not  in  the  light  of  modern  ideas  on 
personal,  civil,  and  political  rights,  but  rather  in  the  light  of  medi- 
aeval law  and  custom.  A  casual  reading  of  the  document  will  lead 
to  innumerable  erroneous  conclusions ;  each  clause  is  thorny  with 
difficult  problems;  and  the  fundamental  character  of  the  docu- 
ment itself  is  in  dispute.  The  most  recent  and  authoritative  com- 
mentary on  Magna  Carta  is  by  Dr.  McKechnie,  to  whose  work 
every  cautious  student  will  turn  before  venturing  hasty  conclusions 
on  the  meaning  of  the  respective  clauses. 

§  i.    Former  Views  on  the  Character  of  Magna  Carta1 

Does  the  Great  Charter  really,  as  the  orthodox  traditional  view 
so  vehemently  asserts,  protect  the  rights  of  the  whole  mass  of  hum- 
ble Englishmen  equally  with  those  of  the  proudest  noble?  Is  it 
really  a  great  bulwark  of  the  constitutional  liberties  of  the  nation, 
considered  as  a  nation,  in  any  broad  sense  of  that  word  ?  Or  is 
it  rather,  in  the  main,  a  series  of  concessions  to  feudal  selfishness 
wrung  from  the  king  by  a  handful  of  powerful  aristocrats?  On 
such  questions,  learned  opinion  is  sharply  divided,  although  an 

1  McKechnie,  Magna  Carta,  pp.  130  ff.  By  permission  of  Dr.  McKechnie 
and  The  Macmillan  Company,  New  York. 

no 


The  True  Nature  of  Magna  Carta  in 

overwhelming  majority  of  authorities  range  themselves  on  the  pop- 
ular side,  from  Coke  (who  assumes  in  every  page  of  his  Second 
Institute  that  the  rights  won  in  1215  were  as  valuable  for  the  villein 
as  for  the  baron)  down  to  writers  of  the  present  day.  Lord  Chat- 
ham, in  one  of  his  great  orations,  insisted  that  the  barons  who 
wrested  the  Charter  from  John  established  claims  to  the  gratitude 
of  posterity  because  they  "did  not  confine  it  to  themselves  alone, 
but  delivered  it  as  a  common  blessing  to  the  whole  people  " ;  and 
Sir  Edward  Creasy,  in  citing  Chatham's  words  with  approval,  caps 
them  with  more  ecstatic  words  of  his  own,  declaring  that  one  effect 
of  the  Charter  was  "to  give  and  to  guarantee  full  protection  for 
property  and  person  to  every  human  being  that  breathes  English 
air."  Lord  Chatham,  indeed,  spoke  with  the  unrestrained  en- 
thusiasm of  an  orator ;  yet  staid  lawyers  and  historians  like  Black- 
stone  and  Hallam  seem  to  vie  with  him  in  similar  expressions. 
"An  equal  distribution  of  civil  rights  to  all  classes  of  freemen  forms 
the  peculiar  beauty  of  the  charter,"  so  we  are  told  by  Hallam. 
Bishop  Stubbs  unequivocally  enunciated  the  same  doctrine. 
"Clause  by  clause  the  rights  of  the  commons  are  provided  for  as 
well  as  the  rights  of  the  nobles.  .  .  .  This  proves,  if  any  proof 
were  wanfe37that  the  demands  of  the  barons  were  no  selfish 
exactions  of  privilege  for  themselves." 

Dr.  Gneist  is  of  the  same  opinion.  "Magna  Carta  was  a  pledge 
of  reconciliation  between  all  classes.  Its  existence  and  ratifica- 
tion maintained  for  centuries  the  notion  of  fundamental  rights  as 
applicable  to  all  classes  in  the  consciousness  that  no  liberties 
would  be  upheld  by  the  superior  classes  for  any  length  of  time, 
without  guarantees  of  personal  liberties  for  the,  humble  also." 

"The  rights  which  the  barons  claimed  for  themselves,"  says 
John  Richard  Green,  before  proceeding  to  enumerate  them, 
"they  claimed  for  the  nation  at  large."  The  testimony  of  a  very 
recent  writer,  Dr.  Hannis  Taylor,  may  close  this  series.  "As 
all  three  orders  participated  equally  in  its  fruits,  the  great  act 
at  Runnymede  was  in  the  fullest  sense  of  the  term  a. national  act, 
and  not  a  mere  act  of  the  baronage  on-behalf  of  their  own  special 
privileges."  It  would  be  easy  to  add  to  this  "cloud  of  witnesses," 
but  enough  has  been  said  to  prove  that  it  has  been  a  common 
boast  of  Englishmen,  for  many  centuries,  that  the  provisions  of 
the  Great  Charter  were  intended  to  secure,  and  did  secure,  the 
liberties  of  every  class  and  individual  of  the  nation,  not  merely 
those  of  the  feudal  magnates  on  whose  initiative  the  quarrel  was 
raised. 


112  English  Historians 

It  must  not  be  forgotten,  however,  that  the  truth  of  historical 
questions  does  not  depend  on  the  counting  of  votes,  or  the  weight 
of  authority;  nor  that  a  vigorous  minority  has  always  protested 
on  the  other  side.  "It  has  been  lately  the  fashion,"  Hallam con- 
fesses, "to  depreciate  the  value  of  Magna  Carta,  as  if  it  had 
sprung  from  the  private  ambition  of  a  few  selfish  barons,  and 
redressed  only  some  feudal  abuses."  It  is  not  safe  to  accept, 
without  a  careful  consideration  of  the  evidence,  the  opinions  cited 
even  from  such  high  authorities.  "Equality"  is  essentially  a 
modern  ideal:  in  1215,  the  various  estates  of  the  realm  may  have 
set  out  on  the  journey  which  was  ultimately  to  lead  them  to  this 
conception,  but  they  had  not  yet  reached  their  goal.  For  many 
centuries  after  the  thirteenth,  class  legislation  maintained  its 
prominent  place  on  the  Statute  Rolls,  and  the  interests  of  the 
various  classes  were  by  no  means  always  identical. 

§  2.    Who  Were  "Freemen"  in  1215 

Two  different  parts  of  the  Charter  have  a  bearing  on  this  ques- 
tion; namely,  chapter  i,  which  explains  to  whom  the  rights  were 
granted,  and  chapter  61,  which  declares  by  whom  they  were  to 
be  ^enforced.  John's  words  clearly  tell  us  that  the  liberties  were 
confirmed  "to  all  the  freemen  of  my  kingdom  and  their  heirs 
forever."  This  opens  up  the  crucial  question,  —  Who  were 
freemen  in  121^? 

The  enthusiasm,  natural  and  even  laudable  in  its  proper  place, 
although  fatal  to  historical  accuracy  in  its  results,  which  seeks  to 
enhance  the  merits  of  Magna  Carta  by  exalting  its  provisions,  and  ex- 
tending their  scope  as  widely  as  possible,  has  led  commentators  to 
stretch  the  meaning  of ' '  freemen  "  to  its  utmost  limits.  The  word  has 
even  been  treated  as  embracing  the  entire  population  of  England, 
including  not  only  churchmen,  merchants,  and  yeomen,  but  even 
villeins  as  well.  There  are  reasons,  however,  for  beljeving  that 
it  should  be  understood  in  a  sense  much  more  restricted,  although 
the  subject  is  darkened  by  the  vagueness  of  the  worcTTand  by  the 
difficulty  of  determining  whether  it  bears 'any  technical  signifi- 
cation or  not.  ^Homo,"  in  mediaeval  law-Latin,  has  a  peculiar 
meaning,  and  was  originally  used  as  synonymous  with  "baro" 
—  all  feudal  vassals,  whether  of  the  crown  or  of  mesne  lords, 
being  described  as  "men"  or  "baronsj*  The  word  was  some- 
times indeed  more  loosely  used,  as  may  have  been  the  case  in 
chapter  i.  Yet  Magna  Carta  is  a  feudal  charter,  and  the  pre- 


The  True   Nature  of  Magna  Carta  113 

sumption  is  in  favor  of  the  technical  feudal  meaning  of  the  word; 
—  a  presumption  certainly  not  weakened  by  the  addition  of  an 
adjective  confining  it  to  the  "free."   (This  qualifying  word  cer- 
tainly excluded  villeins,  and  possibly  also  the  great  burgess  class, 
or  many  of  them.    ' 

There  is  a  passage  in  the  Dialogus  de  Scaccario  (dating  from 
the  close  of  the  reign  of  Henry  II)  in  which  Richard  Fitz-Nigel 
reckons  even  the  richest  burgesses  and  traders  as  not  fully  free. 
He  discusses  the  legal  position  of  any  knight  (miles]  or  other 
freeman  (liber  homo) ,  losing  his  status  by  engaging  in  commerce 
in  order  to  make  money.  This  does  not  prove  that  rich  towns- 
men were  ranked  with  the  villani  of  the  rural  districts;  but  it 
does  raise  a  serious  doubt  whether  in  the  strict  legal  language 
of  feudal  charters  the  words  liberi  homines  would  be  interpreted 
by  contemporary  lawyers  as  including  the  trading  classes.  Such 
doubts  are  strengthened  by  a  narrow  scrutiny  of  those  passages 
of  the  Charter  in  which  the  term  occurs.  In  chapter  34  the  liber 
homo  is,  apparently,  assumed  to  be  a  landowner  with  a  private 
manorial  jurisdiction  of  which  he  may  be  deprived.  In  other 
words,  he  is  the  holder  of  a  freehold  estate  of  some  extent  —  a 
great  barony  or,  at  the  least,  a  manor.  In  this  part  of  the  Char- 
ter the  "freeman"  is  clearly  a  county  gentleman. 

Is  the  "freeman"  of  chapter  i  something  different?  The 
question  must  be  considered  an  open  one;  but  much  might  be 
said  in  favor  of  the  opinion  that  "freeman"  as  used  in  the  Char- 
ter is  synonymous  with  "freeholder";  and  that  therefore  only 
a  limited  class  could,  as  grantees  or  the  heirs  of  such,  make  good 
a  legal  claim  to  share  in  the  liberties  secured  by  Magna  Carta. 

§  3.    The  Character  of  the  Men  Bound  to  Enforce  the  Charter 

To  the  question,  Who  had  authority  to  enforce  its  provisions  ?  the 
Great  Charter  has  likewise  a  clear  answer;  namely,  a  select  band 
or  quasi-committee  of  twenty-five  barons.  Although  the  mayor 
of  London  was  chosen  among  their  number,  it  is  clear  that  no 
strong  support  for  any  democratic  interpretation  of  Magna  Carta 
can  be  founded  on  the  choice  of  executors,  since  these  formed  a 
distinctly  aristocratic  body.  Yet  this  tendency  to  vest  power  ex- 
clusively in  an  oligarchy  composed  of  the  heads  of  great  families 
may  have  been  counteracted,  so  it  is  possible  to  contend,  by  the 
invitation  extended  by  the  same  chapter  to  the  communa  totius 
terrcB  to  assist  the  twenty-five  executors  against  the  king  in  the 


ii4  English  Historians 

event  of  his  breaking  faith.  Unfortunately,  the  extreme  vague- 
ness of  the  phrase  makes  it  rash  in  a  high  degree  to  build  conclu- 
sions on  such  foundations.  It  is  possible  to  interpret  the  words 
communa  totius  terras  as  applying  merely  to  "the  community  of 
freeholders  of  the  land,"  or  even  to  "the  community  of  barons 
of  the  land,"  as  well  as  to  "the  community  of  all  the  estates 
(including  churchmen,  merchants,  and  commons)  of  the  land," 
as  is  usually  done  on  no  authority  save  conjecture.  Every  body 
of  men  was  known  in  the  thirteenth  century  as  a  communa;  a 
word  of  exceedingly  loose  connotation. 

§  4.   Relation  0}  the  Charter  to  the  Classes 

So  far,  our  investigations  by  no  means  prove  that  the  equality 
of  all  classes,  or  the  equal  participation  by  all  in  the  privileges 
of  the  Charter,  was  an  ideal,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  held 
by  the  leaders  of  the  revolt,  against  King  John.  Magna  Carta 
itself  contains  evidences  which  point  the  other  way;  namely,  to 
the  existence  of  class  legislation.  At  the  beginning  and  end  of  the 
Charter,  clauses  are  carefully  inserted  to  secure  to  the  Church 
its  "freedom"  and  privileges;  churchmen,  in  their  special  in- 
terests, must  be  safeguarded,  whoever  else  may  suffer.  "Benefit 
of  clergy,"  thus  secured,  implies  the  very  opposite  of  "equality 
before  the  law."  Other  interests  also  receive  separate  and  privi- 
leged treatment.  Many,  perhaps  most,  of  the  chapters  have  no 
value  except  to  landowners;  a  few  affect  tradesmen  and  towns- 
men exclusively,  while  chapters  20  to  22  adopt  distinct  sets  of 
rules  for  the  amercement  of  the  ordinary  freeman,  the  churchman, 
and  the  earl  or  baron,  respectively  —  an  anticipation,  almost,  of 
the  later  division  into  the  three  estates  of  the  realm  —  commons, 
clergy,  and  lords  temporal.  A  careful  distinction  is  occasionally 
made  (for  example,  in  chapter  20)  between  the  freeman  and  the 
villein,  and  the  latter  (as  will  be  proved  later  on)  was  carefully 
excluded  from  many  of  the  benefits  conferred  on  others  by  Magna 
Carta.  In  this  connection  it  is  interesting  to  consider  how  each 
separate  class  would  have  been  affected  if  John's  promises  had 
been  loyally  kept. 

(i)  The  Feudal  Aristocracy.  —  Even  a  casual  glance  at  the 
clauses  of  the  Great  Charter  shows  how  prominently  abuses  of 
feudal  rights  and  obligations  bulked  in  the  eyes  of  its  promoters. 
Provisions  of  this  type  must  be  considered  chiefly  as  concessions 
to  the  feudal  aristocracy,  although  it  is  true  that  the  relief 


The  True  Nature  of  Magna  Carta  115 

primarily  intended   for  them    indirectly  benefited  other  classes 
as  well. 

(2)  Churchmen.  —  The  position  of  the  Church  is  easily  under- 
stood when  we  neglect  the  privileges  enjoyed  by  its  great  men 
qud  barons  rather  than  qud  prelates.     The  special  Church  clauses 
found  no  place  whatsoever  in  the  Articles  of  the  Barons,  but  bear 
every  appearance  of  having  been  tacked  on  as  an  after-thought, 
due  probably  to  the  influence  of  Stephen  Langton.     Further,  they 
are  mainly  confirmatory  of  the  separate  Charter  already  twice 
granted  within  the  few  preceding  months.   The  National  Church 
indeed,  with  all  its  patriotism,  had  been  careful  to  secure  its  own 
selfish  advantages  before  the  political  crisis  arrived. 

(3)  Tenants  of  Mesne  Lords.  —  When  raising  troops  with  the 
object  of  compelling  John  to  grant  Magna  Carta  by  parade  of 
armed  might,  the  barons  were  perforce  obliged  to  rely  on  the  loyal 
support  of  their  own  freeholders.     It  was  essential  that  the  knights 
and  others  who  held  under  them  should  be  ready  to  fight  for  their 
mesne  lords  rather  than  for  the  king,  their  lord  paramount.     It 
was  thus  absolutely  necessary  that  these  under-tenants  should 
receive  some  recognition  of  their  claims  in  the  provisions  of  the 
final  settlement.     Concessions  conceived  in  their  favor  are  con- 
tained in  two  clauses  (couched  apparently  in  no  specially  generous 
spirit) ;  namely,  chapters  1 5  and  60.     The  former  limits  the  num- 
ber of  occasions  on  which  aids  might  be  extorted  from  subtenants 
by  their  mesne  lords  to  the  same  three  as  were  recognized  in  the 
case  of  the  crown.      Less  than  this  the  barons  could  scarcely 
have  granted.     Chapter  60  provides  generally,  in  vague  words, 
that  all  the  customs  and  liberties  which  John  agrees  to  observe 
towards  his  vassals  shall  be  also  observed  by  mesne  lords,  whether 
prelates  or   laymen,  towards  their  subvassals.      This  provision 
has  met  with  a  chorus  of  applause  from  modern  writers.     Professor 
Prothero  declares  that "  the  subtenant  was  in  all  cases  as  scrupu- 
lously  protected   as    the    tenant-in-chief."     Dr.  Hannis  Taylor 
is  even  more  enthusiastic.     "Animated  by  a  broad  spirit  of  gen- 
erous patriotism,  the  barons  stipulated  in  the  treaty  that  every 
limitation  imposed  for  their  protection  upon  the  feudal  rights  of 
the  king  should  also  be  imposed  upon  their  rights  as  mesne  lords 
in  favor  of  the  under-tenants  who  held   them."     It  must,  how- 
ever, be  remembered  that  a  vague  general  clause  affords  less  pro- 
tection than  a  definite  specific  privilege;   and  that  in  a  rude  age 
such  a  general  declaration  of  principle  might  readily  be  infringed 
when  occasion  arose.     The  barons  were  compelled  to  do  some- 


ii6  English  Historians 

thing,  or  to  pretend  to  do  something,  for  their  under-tenants. 
Apparently  they  did  as  little  as  they,  with  safety  or  decency, 
could. 

(4)  Something  was  also  done  for  the  merchant  and  trading 
classes,  but,  when  we  subtract  what  has  been  read  into  the  Charter 
by  democratic  enthusiasts  of  later  ages,  not  so  much  as  might  rea- 
sonably be  expected  in  a  truly  national  document.     The  existing 
privileges  of  the  great  city  of  London  were  confirmed,  without 
specification,  in  the  Articles  of  the  Barons;   and  some  slight  re- 
forms in   favor  of   its  citizens  (not  too  definitely  worded)  were 
then  added.     An  attentive  examination  seems  to  suggest,  how- 
ever, that  these  privileges  were  carefully  refined  away  when  the 
Articles  were  reduced  to  their  final  form  in  Magna  Carta.     The 
right  to  tallage  London  and  other  towns  was  carefully  reserved 
to  the  crown,  while  the  rights  of  free  trading  granted  to  foreigners 
were  clearly  inconsistent  with  the  policy  of  monopoly  and  protec- 
tion dear  to  the  hearts  of  the  Londoners.     A  mere  confirmation 
to  the  citizens  of  existing  customs,  already  bought  and  paid  for 
at  a  great  price,  seems  but  a  poor  return  for  the  support  given  by 
them  to  the  movement  of  insurrection  at  a  critical  moment  when 
John  was  bidding  high  on  the  opposite  side,  and  when  their  ad- 
herence was  sufficient  to  turn  the  scale.     The  marvel  is  that  so 
little  was  done  for  them. 

(5)  The  relation  of  the  villein  to  the  benefits  of  the  Charter  has 
been  hotly  discussed.     Coke  claims  for  him,  in  regard  to  the  im- 
portant provisions  of  chapter  39  at  least,  that  he  must  be  regarded 
as  a  liber  homo,  and  therefore  as  a  full  participant  in  all  the  ad- 
vantages of  this  clause.     This  contention  is  not  well  founded. 
Even  admitting  the  relativity  of  the  word  liber  in  the  thirteenth 
century,  and  admitting  also  that  the  villein  performed  some  of 
the  duties,  if  he  enjoyed  none  of  the  rights  of  the  free-born,  still 
the  formal  description  liber  homo,  when  used  in  a  feudal  charter, 
cannot  be  stretched  to  cover  those  useful  manorial  chattels  that 
had  no  recognized  place  in  the  feudal  scheme  of  society  or  in  the 
political  constitution  of  England,  however  necessary  they  might 
be  in  the  scheme  of  the  particular  manor  to  the  soil  of  which  they 
were  attached. 

Even  if  we  exclude  the  villein  from  the  general  benefits  of  the 
grant,  it  may  be,  and  has  been,  maintained  that  some  few  privi- 
leges were  insured  to  him  in  his  own  name.  One  clause,  at  least, 
is  specially  framed  for  his  protection.  The  villein,  so  it  is  pro- 
vided in  chapter  21,  must  not  be  so  cruelly  amerced  as  to  leave 


The  True  Nature  of  Magna  Carta  117 

him  utterly  destitute;  his  plough  and  its  equipment  must  be 
saved  to  him.  Such  concessions,  however,  are  quite  consistent 
with  a  denial  of  all  political  rights,  and  even  of  all  civil  rights, 
as  these  are  understood  in  a  modern  age.  The  Crown  and  the 
magnates,  so  it  may  be  urged,  were  only  consulting  their  own 
interests  when  they  left  the  villein  the  means  to  carry  on  his  farm- 
ing operations,  and  so  to  pay  off  the  balance  of  his  debts  in  the 
future.  The  closeness  of  his  bond  to  the  lord  of  his  manor  made 
it  impossible  to  crush  the  one  without  slightly  injuring  the  other. 
The  villein  was  protected,  not  as  the  acknowledged  subject  of 
legal  rights,  but  because  he  formed  a  valuable  asset  of  his  lord. 
This  attitude  is  illustrated  by  a  somewhat  peculiar  expression 
used  in  chapter  4,  which  prohibited  injury  to  the  estate  of  a  ward 
by  "waste  of  men  or  things."  For  a  guardian  to  raise  a  villein  to 
the  status  of  a  freeman  was  to  benefit  the  enfranchised  peasant 
at  the  expense  of  his  young  master. 

Other  clauses  both  of  John's  Charter  and  of  the  various  re- 
issues show  scrupulous  care  to  avoid  infringing  the  rights  of  prop- 
erty enjoyed  by  manorial  lords  over  their  villeins.  The  king  could 
not  amerce  other  people's  villeins  harshly,  although  those  on  his 
own  farms  might  be  amerced  at  his  discretion.  Chapter  16 
while  carefully  prohibiting  any  arbitrary  increase  of  service  from 
freehold  property,  leaves  by  inference  all  villein  holdings  unpro- 
tected. Then  the  "farms"  or  rents  of  ancient  demesne  might 
be  arbitrarily  raised  by  the  crown,  and  tallages  might  be  arbi- 
trarily taken  (measures  likely  to  press  hardly  on  the  villein  class). 
The  villein  was  deliberately  left  exposed  to  the  worst  forms  of 
purveyance,  from  which  chapters  28  and  30  rescued  his  betters. 
The  horses  and  implements  of  the  villanus  were  still  at  the  mercy 
of  the  crown's  purveyors.  The  re-issue  of  1217  confirms  this 
view;  while  demesne  wagons  were  protected,  those  of  the  vil- 
leins were  left  exposed.  Again,  'he  chapter  which  takes  the  place 
of  the  famous  chapter  39  of  1215  makes  it  clear  that  lands  held 
in  villeinage  are  not  to  be  protected  from  arbitrary  disseizin  or 
dispossession.  The  villein  was  left  by  the  common  law  merely 
a  tenant-at-will,  —  subject  to  arbitrary  ejectment  by  his  lord,— 
whatever  meagre  measure  of  protection  he  might  obtain  under 
the  "custom  of  the  manor,"  as  interpreted  by  the  court  of  the  lord 
who  oppressed  him. 

Even  if  it  were  possible  to  neglect  the  significance  of  any  one 
of  these  somewhat  trivial  points,  when  all  of  them  are  placed  side 
by  side,  their  meaning  is  clear.  If  the  bulk  of  the  English  peas 


ii8  English  Historians 

antry  were  protected  at  all  by  Magna  Carta,  that  was  merely  be- 
cause they  formed  valuable  assets  of  their  lords.  The  Charter 
viewed  them  as  "villeins  regardant"  —  as  chattels  attached  to 
a  manor,  not  as  members  of  an  English  commonwealth. 

The  general  conclusion  to  be  derived  from  this  survey  is  that, 
while  much  praise  may  be  due  to  the  baronial  leaders  for  their 
comparatively  liberal  interest  in  the  rights  of  others,  they  are 
scarcely  entitled  to  the  excessive  laudation  they  have  sometimes 
received. 

The  rude  beginnings  of  many  features  which  have  since  come 
into  prominence  in  English  institutions  (such  as  the  concep- 
tions of  patriotism  and  nationality,  and  the  principles  of  equality 
before  the  law,  and  the  tender  regard  for  the  rights  of  the  humble) 
may  possibly  be  found  in  the  germ  in  some  parts  of  the  completed 
Charter;  but  the  Articles  of  the  Barons  were  what  their  name 
implies,  —  a  baronial  manifesto,  seeking  chiefly  to  redress  the 
grievances  of  the  promoters,  and  mainly  selfish  in  motive. 

§  5.    The  Great  Charter  as  a  Prominent  Landmark 

Yet,  when  all  deductions  have  been  made  (and  it  has  seemed 
necessary  to  do  this  with  emphasis  in  order  to  redress  the  false 
balance  created  by  the  exaggerations  of  enthusiasts),  the  Great 
Charter  still  stands  out  as  a  prominent  landmark  in  the  sequence 
of  events  which  have  led  in  an  unbroken  chain  to  the  consolida- 
tion of  the  English  nation,  and  to  the  establishment  of  a  free  and 
constitutional  form  of  polity  upon  a  basis  so  enduring  that,  after 
more  than  eight  centuries  of  growth,  it  still  retains  the  vigor  and 
buoyance  of  youth. 

No  evidence  survives  to  show  that  the  men  of  John's  reign 
placed  any  excessive  or  exaggerated  importance  on  the  Great 
Charter ;  but,  without  a  break  since  then,  the  estimate  of  its  worth 
steadily  increased  until  it  came  to  be  regarded  almost  as  a  fetich 
among  English  lawyers  and  historians.  No  estimate  of  its  value 
can  be  too  high,  and  no  words  too  emphatic  or  glowing  to  satisfy 
its  votaries.  In  many  a  time  of  national  crisis,  Magna  Carta 
has  been  confidently  appealed  to  as  a  fundamental  law  too  sacred 
to  be  altered  —  as  a  talisman  containing  some  magic  spell,  capable 
of  averting  national  calamity. 

Are  these  estimates  of  its  value  justified  by  facts,  or  are  they 
gross  exaggerations?  Did  it  really  create  an  epoch  in  English 
history  ?  If  so,  wherein  did  its  importance  exactly  lie  ? 


The  True  Nature  of  Magna  Carta  119 


§  6.  Intrinsic  Merits  o]  the  Charter 

The  numerous  factors  which  contributed  towards  the  worth  of 
Magna  Carta  may  be  distinguished  as  of  two  kinds,  intrinsic  and 
extrinsic,  (i)  Its  intrinsic  value  depends  on  the  nature  of  its 
own  provisions.  The  reforms  demanded  by  the  banjns  and  granted 
by  this  Charter  were  jusf  and  moderate.  The  avoidance  of  all 
extremes  tended  towards  a  permanent  settlement,  since  modera- 
tion both  gains  and  keeps  adherents.  Its  aims  were  practical 
as  weJL-as  moderate;  the  language  in  which  they  were  framed, 
clear 'and  straightforward.  A  high  authority  has  described  the 
Charter  as  "an  intensely  practical  document."  This  practi- 
cality is  an  essentially  English  characteristic,  and  strikes  the  key- 
note of  almost  every  great  movement  for  reform  which  has  held 
a  permanent  place  in  English  history.  Closely  connected  with 
this  feature  is  another,  the  essentially  legal  nature  of  the  whole. 
As  Magna  Carta  was  rarely  absent  fronitheTnThds  of  subsequent 
opponents  of  despotism,  a  practical  and  legal  direction  was  thus 
given  to  the  efforts  of  Englishmen  in  many  ages.  Therein  lies 
another  English  characteristic.  While  democratic  enthusiasts 
in  France  and  America  have  often  sought  to  found  their  rights 
and  liberties  on  a  lofty  but  unstable  basis  of  philosophical  theory 
embodied  in  Declarations  of  Rights,  Englishmen  have  occupied 
lower  but  surer  ground,  aiming  at  practical  remedies  for  actual 
wrongs,  rather  than  enunciating  theoretical  platitudes  with  no 
realities  to  correspond. 

Another  intrinsic  merit  of  the  Charter  was  that  it  made  definite 
what  had  been  vague  before.  Definition  is  a  valuable  protection 
for  the  weak  agaiTist  the  strong ;  whereas  vagueness  increases  the 
powers  of  the  tyrant  who  can  interpret  while  he  enforces  the  law. 
Misty  rights  were  now  reduced  to  a  tangible  form,  and  could  no 
longer  be  broken  with  so  great  impunity.  Magna  Carta  contained 
no  crude  innovations,  and  confirmed  many  principles  whose 
value  was  enhanced  by  their  antiquity.  King  John,  in  recognizing 
parts  of  the  old  Anglo-Saxon  customary  law,  put  himself  in  touch 
with  national  traditions  and  the  past  history  of  the  nation.  Fur- 
ther, the  nature  of  the  provisions  bears  witness  to  the  broad  basis 
on  which  the  settlement  was  intended  to  be  built.  The  Charter, 
notwithstanding  the  prominence  given  to  the  redress  of  feudal 
grievances,  redressed  other  grievances  as  well.  In  this,  the  in- 
fluence of  the  Church,  and  notably  of  its  primate,  can  be  traced. 


I2O  English  Historians 

Some  little  attention  was  given  to  the  rights  of  the  under-tenants 
also,  and  even  to  those  of  the  merchants,  while  the  villein  and 
the  alien  were  not  left  entirely  unprotected.  Thus  the  settlement 
contained  in  the  Charter  had  a  broad  basis  in  the  affection  of  all 
classes. 

§  7.   Possible  Exaggeration  of  the  Charter  as  a   Triumph  over 
Absolutism 

(2)  Part  of  the  value  of  Magna  Carta  may  be  traced  to  extrin- 
sic causes;  to  the  circumstances  which  gave  it  birth;  to  its 
vivid  historical  setting.  The  importance  of  each  one  of  its  pro- 
visions is  emphasized  by  the  object-lessons  which  accompanied 
its  inauguration.  The  whole  of  Christendom  was  amazed  by 
the  spectacle  of  the  king  of  a  great  nation  obliged  to  surrender 
at  discretion  to  his  own  subjects,  and  that,  too,  after  he  had  scorn- 
fully rejected  all  suggestions  of  a  compromise.  The  fact  that  John 
was  compelled  to  accept  the  Charter  meant  a  loss  of  royal  prestige 
and  also  great  encouragement  to  future  rebels.  What  once  had 
happened,  might  happen  again;  and  the  humiliation  of  the  king 
was  stamped  as  a  powerful  image  on  the  minds  of  future  genera- 
tions. 

Such  considerations  almost  justify  enthusiasts,  who  hold  that 
the  granting  of  Magna  Carta  was  the  turning-point  in  English 
history.  Henceforward  it  was  more  difficult  for  the  king  to  in- 
vade the  rights  of  others.  Where  previously  the  vagueness  of 
the  law  lent  itself  to  invasion,  its  clear  restatement  and  ratifica- 
tion in  1215  pinned  down  the  king  to  a  definite  issue.  He  could 
no  longer  plead  that  he  sinned  in  ignorance ;  he  must  either  keep 
the  law  or  openly  defy  it  —  no  middle  course  was  possible. 

When  all  this  has  been  said,  it  may  still  be  doubted  whether  the 
belief  of  enthusiasts  in  the  excessive  importance  of  Magna  Carta 
has  been  fully  justified.  Many  other  triumphs,  almost  equally 
important,  have  been  won  in  the  cause  of  liberty,  and  under  cir- 
cumstances almost  equally  notable,  and  many  statutes  have  been 
passed  embodying  these.  Why,  then,  should  Magna  Carta  be 
invariably  extolled  as  the  palladium  of  English  liberties  ?  Is  not, 
when  all  is  said,  the  extreme  merit  attributed  to  it  mainly  of  a 
sentimental  or  imaginative  nature  ?  Such  questions  must  be  an- 
swered partly  in  the  affirmative.  Much  of  its  value  does  depend 
on  sentiment.  Yet  all  government  is,  in  a  sense,  founded  upon 
sentiment  —  sometimes  affection,  sometimes  fear. 


The  True  Nature  of  Magna  Carta  121 

Psychological  considerations  are  all-powerful  in  the  practical 
affairs  of  life.  Intangible  and  even  unreal  phenomena  have 
played  an  important  part  in  the  history  of  every  nation.  The 
tie  that  binds  the  British  colonies  at  the  present  day  to  the  mother 
country  is  largely  one  of  sentiment ;  yet  the  troopers  from  Canada 
and  New  Zealand  who  responded  to  the  call  of  Britain  in  her  hour 
of  need  produced  practical  results  of  an  obvious  nature.  The 
element  of  sentiment  in  politics  can  never  be  ignored. 

§  8.    Value  of  the  Charter  to  Later  Generations 

It  is  no  disparagement  to  Magna  Carta,  then,  to  confess  that 
part  of  its  powers  has  been  read  into  it  by  later  generations,  and 
lies  in  the  halo,  almost  of  romance,  which  has  gradually  gathered 
round  it  in  the  course  of  centuries.  It  became  a  battle-cry  for  fu- 
ture ages,  a  banner,  a  rallying  point,  a  stimulus  to  the  imagination. 
For  a  king,  thereafter,  openly  to  infringe  the  promises  contained 
in  the  Great  Charter,  was  to  challenge  the  bitterness  of  public 
opinion  —  to  put  himself  palpably  in  the  wrong.  For  an  aggrieved 
man,  however  humble,  to  base  his  rights  upon  its  terms  was  to 
enlist  the  warm  sympathy  of  all.  Time  and  again,  from  the 
Barons'  War  against  Henry  III,  to  the  days  of  John  Hampden 
and  Oliver  Cromwell,  the  possibility  of  appealing  to  the  words 
of  Magna  Carta  has  afforded  a  practical  ground  for  opposition ; 
an  easily  intelligible  principle  to  fight  for;  a  fortified  position  to 
hold  against  the  enemies  of  the  national  freedom.  The  exact 
way  in  which  this  particular  document  —  dry  as  its  details  at 
first  sight  may  seem  —  has,  when  considered  as  a  whole,  fired  the 
popular  imagination,  is  difficult  to  determine.  Such  a  task  lies 
rather  within  the  sphere  of  the  student  of  psychology  than  of  the 
student  of  history,  as  usually  conceived.  However  difficult  it 
may  be  to  explain  this  phenomenon,  there  is  no  doubt  of  its  exist- 
ence. The  importance  of  the  Great  Charter,  originally  flowing 
both  from  the  intrinsic  and  from  the  extrinsic  features  already 
described,  has  greatly  increased,  as  traditions,  associations,  and 
aspirations  have  clustered  more  thickly  round  it.  These  have 
augmented  in  each  succeeding  age  the  reverence  in  which  it  has 
been  held,  and  have  made  ever  more  secure  its  hold  upon  the 
popular  imagination. 

Thus  Magna  Carta,  in  addition  to  its  legal  value,  has  a 
political  value  of  an  equally  emphatic  kind.  Apart  from  and 
beyond  the  salutary  effect  of  the  many  useful  laws  it  contained, 


122  English  Historians 

/  its  moral  influence  has  contributed  to  a  marked  advance  of  the 
^  national  spirit,  and  therefore  of  the  national  liberties.  A  few  of 
the  aspects  of  this  advance  deserve  to  be  emphasized.  The  king, 
by  granting  the  Charter  in  solemn  form,  admitted  that  he  was 
not  an  absolute  ruler;  admitted  that  he  had  a  master  over  him 
in  the  laws  which  he  had  often  violated,  but  which  he  now  swore 
to  obey.  Magna  Carta  has  thus  been  truly  said  to  enunciate 
and  inaugurate  "the  reign  of  law"  or  "the  rule  of  law"  in  the 
phrase  made  famous  by  Professor  Dicey. 

§  9.    The  Charter  as  a  "Turning- point" 

It  marks  also  the  commencement  of  a  new  grouping  of  political 
forces  in  England ;  indeed,  without  such  an  arrangement  the  win- 
ning of  the  Charter  would  have  been  impossible.  Throughout 
the  reign  of  Richard  I  the  old  tacit  understanding  between  the 
king  and  the  lower  classes  had  been  endangered  by  the  heavy 
drain  of  taxation;  but  the  actual  break-up  of  the  old  alliance 
only  came  in  the  crisis  of  John's  reign.  Henceforward  can  be 
traced  a  gradual  change  in  the  balance  of  parties  in  the  common- 
wealth. No  longer  are  crown  and  people  united,  in  the  name  of 
law  and  order,  against  the  baronage,  standing  for  feudal  disinte- 
gration. The  mass  of  humble  free  men  and  the  Church  are  for 
the  moment  in  league  with  the  barons,  in  the  name  of  law  and 
order,  against  the  crown,  recently  become  the  chief  law-breaker. 

The  possibility  of  the  existence  of  such  an  alliance,  even  on  a 
temporary  basis,  involved  the  adoption  by  its  chief  members  of 
a  new  baronial  policy.  Hitherto  each  great  baron  had  aimed  at 
his  own  independence  or  aggrandizement,  striving  on  the  one  hand 
to  gain  new  franchises  for  himself,  or  to  widen  the  scope  of  those 
he  already  had ;  and  on  the  other  to  weaken  the  king  and  to  keep 
him  outside  these  franchises.  This  policy,  which  succeeded  both 
in  France  and  in  Scotland,  had  before  John's  reign  already  failed 
signally  in  England,  and  the  English  barons  now,  on  the  whole, 
came  to  admit  the  hopelessness  of  renewing  the  struggle  for  feu- 
dal independence.  They  substituted  for  this  ideal  of  an  earlier 
age  a  more  progressive  policy.  The  king,  whose  interference 
they  could  no  longer  hope  completely  to  shake  off,  must  at  least 
be  taught  to  interfere  justly  and  according  to  rule ;  he  must  walk 
only  by  law  and  custom,  not  by  the  caprices  of  his  evil  heart. 
The  barons  sought  henceforward  to  control  the  royal  power 
they  could  not  exclude;  they  desired  some  determining  share  in 


The  True  Nature  of  Magna  Carta  123 

the  National  Councils,  if  they  could  no  longer  hope  to  create  little 
nations  of  their  own  within  the  four  corners  of  their  fiefs.  Magna 
Carta  was  the  fruit  of  this  new  policy. 

It  has  been  often  repeated,  and  with  truth,  that  the  Great  Char- 
ter marks  also  a  stage  in  the  growth  of  national  unity  or  nationality. 
Here,  however,  it  is  necessary  to  guard  against  exaggeration.  It 
is  merely  one  movement  in  a  process,  rather  than  a  final  achieve- 
ment. We  must  somewhat  discount,  while  still  agreeing  in  the 
main  with,  statements  which  declare  the  Charter  to  be  "the  first 
documentary  proof  of  the  existence  of  a  united  English  nation  " ; 
or  with  the  often-quoted  words  of  Dr.  Stubbs,  that  "the  Great 
Charter  is  the  first  great  public  act  of  the  nation,  after  it  has 
realized  its  own  identity." 

A  united  English  nation,  whether  conscious  or  unconscious  of 
its  identity,  cannot  be  said  to  have  existed  in  1215,  except  under 
several  qualifications.  The  conception  of  "nationality,"  in  the 
modern  sense,  is  of  comparatively  recent  origin,  and  requires 
that  the  lower  as  well  as  the  higher  classes  should  be  comprehended 
within  its  bounds.  Further,  the  coalition  which  wrested  the 
Charter  from  the  royal  tyrant  was  essentially  of  a  temporary 
nature,  and  quickly  fell  to  pieces  again.  Even  while  the  alliance 
continued,  the  interests  of  the  various  classes,  as  has  been  already 
shown,  were  far  from  identical.  Political  rights  were  treated 
as  the  monopoly  of  the  few  (as  is  evidenced  by  the  retrograde 
provisions  of  chapter  14  for  the  composition  of  the  commune 
concilium) ;  and  civil  rights  were  far  from  universally  distributed. 
The  leaders  of  the  "national"  movement  certainly  gave  no  politi- 
cal rights  to  the  despised  villeins,  who  comprised  more  than  three- 
quarters  of  the  entire  population  of  England ;  while  their  civil 
rights  were  almost  completely  ignored  in  the  provisions  of  the 
Charter. 

Magna  Carta  undoubtedly  marked  one  step,  an  important 
step,  in  the  process  by  which  England  became  a  nation ;  but  that 
step  was  neither  the  first  nor  yet  the  final  one. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Stubb«,  Constitutional  History,  Vol.  I,  pp.  569  tT.  Pollock  and  Maitland, 
History  of  English  Law,  Vol.  I,  pp.  i  71-172.  Adams,  A  Political  History  of 
England,  1066-1216,  chap,  xxi ;  The  Critical  Period  of  English  Constitu- 
tional History,  in  the  American  Historical  Review,  igoo,  pp.  643  ff.  Stubbs, 
Lectures  on  Early  English  History,  chap.  xx.  Kate  Norgate,  John  Lackland. 
Jenks,  The  Myth  of  Magna  Carta,  in  the  Independent  Review,  1904,  pp. 
260  ff. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  ORIGIN   OF   PARLIAMENT 

THE  attempts  of  the  barons  to  control  the  actions  of  the  crown 
by  the  definition  of  royal  rights  in  Magna  Carta  were  far  from 
successful.  Likewise  the  efforts  of  the  barons  to  establish  an 
oligarchy,  such  as  that  defined  in  the  Provisions  of  Oxford 
and  Westminster  in  the  reign  of  Henry  III,  failed  to  secure 
satisfactory  and  stable  government.  The  expenses  of  royal 
government  were  steadily  increasing,  the  income  under  %  feudal 
prerogatives  was  inadequate  as  a  source  of  revenue,  and  the 
amount  of  movable  property  as  contrasted  with  landed  prop- 
erty was  increasing  with  the  development  of  trading  and 
industrial  classes.  In  view  of  the  stout  resistance  of  the  barons 
to  arbitrary  exactions,  it  appeared  inevitable  that  the  king,  in 
order  to  reach  the  various  sources  of  revenue  within  his  realm, 
would  have  to  call  to  his  council  the  representatives  of  the  domi- 
nant classes.  One  must  say  dominant  classes,  for,  as  we  have 
seen,  the  peasants  of  England,  for  political  purposes,  were  prac- 
tically non-existent.  The  best  short  account  of  just  how  the 
royal  council  was  transformed  into  a  representative  assembly  is 
given  by  Dr.  Stubbs  in  his  Select  Charters,  where  the  student 
will  find  all  the  documents  illustrating  the  course  of  this 
development. 

§  i.   The  Elements  of  Constitutional  Government1 

The  idea  of  constitutional  government,  defined  by  the  measures 
of  Edward  I,  and  summed  up  in  the  legal  meaning  of  the  word 
parliament,  implies  four  principles:  first,  the  existence  of  a 
central  or  national  assembly,  a  commune  concilium  regni; 

1  Stubbs,  Select  Charters,  pp.  36  ff.  By  permission  of  the  Delegates  of 
the  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford. 

124 


The  Origin  of  Parliament  125 

second,  the  representation  in  that  assembly  of  all  classes  of  the 
people  regularly  summoned;  third,  the  reality  of  the  representa- 
tion of  the  whole  people,  secured  either  by  its  presence  in  the  coun- 
cil or  by  the  free  election  of  the  persons  who  are  to  represent  it 
or  any  portion  of  it;  and  fourth,  the  assembly  so  summoned  and 
elected  must  possess  definite  powers  of  taxation,  legislation,  and 
general  political  deliberation.  We  will  now  trace  very  briefly 
the  origin,  growth,  and  combination  of  these. 

§  2.    The  Early  National  Assembly 

The  commune  concilium  had  existed  from  the  earliest  times, 
first,  as  the  witenagemot,  and  afterwards  as  the  court  of  the  king's 
vassals,  or,  in  a  manner,  as  combining  the  characters  of  both.  It 
had  in  neither  stage  been  representative,  in  the  modern  meaning 
of  the  word.  The  witenagemot  acted  for  the  nation,  but  was 
not  delegated  or  elected  by  it;  the  great  council  of  the  Norman 
kings  included  in  theory  all  tenants-in-chief  of  the  crown,  but  had 
no  special  provision  for  these  to  represent  their  under-tenants, 
or  for  the  securing  of  the  rights  of  any  not  personally  present. 
The  witenagemot  possessed  and  exercised  all  the  powers  of  -a 
free  council;  the  Norman  court  or  parliament  claiming  the  char- 
acter of  a  witenagemot,  if  it  possessed  these  rights  in  theory, 
did  not  exercise  them.  At  no  period,  however,  of  our  early  his- 
tory was  the  assembling  of  the  national  council  dispensed  with. 

§  3.    The  Principle  oj  Representation 

The  representation  of  all  classes  of  the  people  is  necessary  for 
the  complete  organization  of  a  national  council,  and  that  com- 
plete organization  is  legally  constituted  by  summons  to  parlia- 
ment. In  this  three  principles  are  involved:  the  idea  of  repre- 
sentation, the  idea  of  exhaustive  representation,  and  the  definite 
summons. 

The  idea  of  representation  was  familiar  to  the  English  in  the 

minor  courts,  the  hundred-moot  and  the  shire-moot.     The  reeve 

and  four  men  represented  the  township  in  these  assemblies;    the 

twelve  assessors  of  the  sheriff  represented  the  judicial  opinion, 

sometimes  the  collective  legal  knowledge  of  the  shire.     At  a  later 

period  the  inquest  by  sworn  recognitors,  in  civil  suits,  in  the  pre- 

••  sentment  of  criminals,  and  in  the  assessment  of  real  and  personal 

t,  **  ^property,  represented  the  country,  that  is,  the  shire  or  hundred  or 

-  borough,  for  whose  business  they  were  sworn  to  answer. 


English  Historians 


§  4.   Classes  0}  Persons  Represented 

The  political  constituents  of  the  nation  (exclusive  of  the  king) 
— the  three  estates  of  the  realm — are  the  clergy,  the  baronage,  and 
the  commons.  A  perfect  national  council  must  include  all  these : 
the  baronage  by  personal  attendance,  the  clergy  and  people  by 
representation.  The  bishops,  although  their  right  to  appear  per- 
sonally in  the  commune  concilium  is  older  than  the  introduction 
of  the  feudal  principle  on  which  the  theory  of  baronage  is  based, 
have,  by  the  definition  of  lawyers,  been  made  to  sink  their  charac- 
ter of  witan  in  that  of  barons,  amongst  whom  they  may  for  our 
present  purpose  be  included.  The  representation  of  the  estates 
then  implies  the  union  in  parliament  of  (i)  the  baronage,  lay  and 
clerical;  (2)  the  lower  clergy;  and  (3)  the  commons. 

(1)  The  baronage,  in  its  verbal  meaning,  includes  all  barones, 
that  is,  all  homagers  holding  directly  of  the  crovn,  but  by  succes- 
sive changes,  the  progress  of  which  is  far  from  easy  to  fix  chrono- 
logically, it  has  been  limited,    first,  to  all  who  possess  a  united 
corpus,  or  collection  of  knights'  fees   held  under  one  title;  sec- 
ondly, to  those  who,  possessing  such  a  barony,  are  summoned  by 
special  writ;  thirdly,  to  those  who,  whether  entitled  by  such  tenure 
or  not,  have  received  a  special  summons;    and  finally,  to  those 
who  have  become  by  creation  or  prescription  entitled  hereditarily 
to  receive  such  a  summons.     The  variations  of  dignity  among  the 
persons  so  summoned,  represented  by  the  names  duke,  marquis, 
earl,  and  viscount  are  of  no  constitutional  significance.      The 
baronial  title  of  the  bishops  and  mitred  abbots  originated  in  the 
second  and  third  of  the  principles  thus  stated. 

(2)  The  inferior  clergy  had  immemorially  their  diocesan  assem- 
blies and  their  share  in  the  provincial  councils  of  the  Church  — 
a  share  which  would  be  as  difficult  to  define  as  is  that  of  the  plebs 
or   populus  in   the   commune  concilium   regni,  but   which   does 
not  much  affect  constitutional  history  until  the  period  of  Magna 
Carta.     At  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century  the  doctrine 
was  gaining  ground  that  the  taxpayer  should  have  a  voice  in  the 
bestowal  of  the  tax;  the  legal  position  of  the  beneficed  clergy  had 
been  long  definitely  settled;    and  the  changes  in  the  character 
of  taxation  took  from  them  the  immunities  which  they  had  earlier 
possessed  and  still  persistently  claimed. 

The  aids  which  John  condescended  to  ask  of  the  inferior  clergy 
were  not  granted  by  assemblies,  but  collected  by  separate  nego- 


The  Origin  of  Parliament  127 

tiation  through  the  archdeacons,  in  the  same  way  that  the  sheriff  or 
the  itinerant  judges  negotiated  the  aids  of  the  towns  and  counties. 
In  a  council  held  by  John  in  1207  the  regular  clergy  were  repre- 
sented by  abbots;  in  another,  in  1213,  the  cathedral  clergy  were 
represented  by  the  deans;  the  rest  of  the  clergy  not  at  all.  In 
both  of  these  cases  there  are  analogies  with  the  dealings  of  the 
lay  estates  that  might  be  traced  at  length.  Passing  over  the 
anomalous  councils  of  the  next  forty  years,  we  find  in  1254  a  writ 
directing  the  archbishops  and  bishops  to  assemble  all  the  clergy 
for  the  purpose  of  granting  an  aid;  in  1255  the  proctors  of  the 
clergy  appeared  in  parliament  at  Westminster. 

In  1283  Edward  I  summoned  them  by  their  proctors  to  great 
councils  at  Northampton  and  York;  in  1294  they  were  summoned 
by  their  proctors  to  the  parliament  at  Westminster;  and  in  1295 
by  the  clause  prcemunientes  in  the  writ  summoning  the  bishops 
to  parliament,  the  clergy  were  summoned  to  appear  there,  the 
deans  and  priors  of  the  cathedrals  and  the  archdeacons  in  person, 
the  chapters  by  one  proctor,  and  the  clergy  of  each  diocese  by  two, 
having  full  and  sufficient  power  from  the  chapters  and  the  clergy. 
This  clause  has  been  inserted,  with  a  few  exceptions,  ever  since, 
the  constant  usage  dating,  as  stated  by  Hody,  from  the  28th  of 
Edward  III;  but  it  has  not  been  acted  upon  since  the  fourteenth 
century.  We  may  trace  in  this  the  defining  hand  of  Edward  I, 
who  doubtless  intended  by  this  means  to  introduce  a  complete  and 
symmetrical  system  of  representation  into  the  lower  department 
of  his  parliament.  It  was  defeated  by  the  clergy  themselves, 
who  preferred  to  vote  their  aids  in  convocation,  their  own  special 
assembly  or  provincial  council  which,  also,  during  the  reign  of 
Edward  I,  was  a  few  years  earlier  reconstituted  on  the  represen- 
tative basis,  in  two  divisions,  one  meeting  at  London  and  the 
other  at  York.  The  convocations,  which  were  summoned  by 
the  archbishops  and  were  divided  according  to  the  provinces,  the 
measure  of  representation  differing  in  the  two,  must  be  carefully 
distinguished  from  the  parliamentary  representation  of  the  clergy, 
which  was  summoned  by  the  king's  writ  directed  to  the  archbishops 
and  bishops,  and  was  intended  to  be  an  estate  of  parliament. 

The  commons  must  be  regarded  as  composed,  for  political 
purposes,  of  the  population  of  the  shires,  the  ancient  divisions 
on  the  administration  of  which  the  early  political  system  of  the 
country  was  based,  and  that  of  the  towns  or  boroughs,  which 
had  been  erected  by  successive  grants  of  privileges  into  the  status 
of  substantive  political  bodies. 


128  English  Historians 


§  5.   Origin  of  County  Representation 

Enough  has  been  said  already  of  the  origin  and  growth  of  repre- 
sentation in  the  former.  It  would  not  appear  that  there  was  any 
provision  for  the  incorporation  of  the  representatives  of  the  shires 
in  the  commune  concilium  before  the  reign  of  John;  and  when 
the  principle  is  adopted,  it  is  questionable  whether  they  owed  their 
privilege  to  their  constitutional  position  as  the  most  prominent 
portion  of  an  estate  of  the  realm,  or  to  their  being  the  most  ready 
machinery  for  the  representation  of  the  minor  barons,  the  lower 
tenants  of  the  crown.  The  i4th  Article  of  Magna  Carta  promises 
that  these  shall  be  summoned  by  a  general  writ  and  through  the 
sheriffs.  The  only  constitutional  mode  of  the  sheriff's  action  was 
in  the  county  court.  Hence  the  minor  barons,  to  be  consulted 
at  all,  must  be  consulted  in  the  county  court.  But  that  court 
was  already  constituted  of  all  the  freeholders,  and  the  machinery 
of  representation  and  election  was  already  familiar  to  them.  It 
would  then  appear  certain  that  from  the  time  at  which  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  shires  were  first  summoned,  they  were  held  to 
represent  the  whole  body  of  freeholders;  and  although  there  was 
at  a  later  period  a  question  whether  the  wages  of  the  knights  of 
the  shire  should  be  paid  by  the  whole  body  of  freeholders,  or  only 
by  the  tenants  in  knight  service,  it  was  never  peremptorily  deter- 
mined; nor  has  there  ever  been  a  doubt  but  that  the  representa- 
tion was  that  of  the  whole"  shire,  and  the  election  made,  theoreti- 
cally at  least,  in  plena  comitatu,  down  to  the  Act  of  Henry  VI, 
which  restricted  the  electoral  franchise  to  the  forty  shilling  free- 
holders. 

The  first  occasion  on  which  the  representatives  of  the  shires 
were  summoned  to  consult  with  the  king  and  other  estates  is  in 
the  i5th  of  John,  1213,  when  the  king  by  writ  addressed  to  the 
sheriffs,  directs  that  four  discreet  men  of  each  shire  shall  be 
sent  to  him,  ad  loquendum  nobiscum  de  negotiis  regni  nostri. 
These  "four  discreet  men"  must  be  regarded  in  connection  with 
the  custom  of  electing  four  knights  in  the  county  court  to  nominate 
the  recognitors  and  grand  jury;  and  the  I4th  Clause  of  the  Char- 
ter, directing  the  summons  of  the  minor  barons  by  the  sheriffs 
must  be  interpreted  or  illustrated  by  this  writ.  The  next  case  in 
which  it  is  clear  that  representatives  of  the  shire  were  called  to 
parliament  is  that  of  1254,  when  two  knights  represent  each  county. 
In  1261  the  barons,  and  after  them  Henry  III  in  opposition,  sum- 


The  Origin  of  Parliament  129 

moned  three  knights  from  each  shire.  In  1264  Simon  de  Montfort 
summoned  four;  to  the  famous  Assembly  of  1265  he  summoned  two. 
In  the  great  Assembly  which  swore  allegiance  to  Edward  I  in  1273, 
four  knights, and  in  the  second  Parliament  of  1275  two,  represented 
each  shire.  The  mention  of  the  commonalty  in  the  early  writs 
and  statutes  of  Edward  I  seems  to  show  that  the  practice  was 
pursued  with  some  approach  to  continuity,  and  certainly  in  some 
cases,  as  in  the  Councils  of  1 283  and  in  the  Parliament  of  Shrews- 
bury, it  was  fully  carried  out.  But  the  character  of  these  assem- 
blies is  a  matter  of  debate,  and  it  cannot  certainly  be  said  that  the 
knights  of  the  shire  were  formally  summoned  to  proper  par- 
liaments until  the  year  1290,  or  that  they  were  regarded  as  a 
necessary  ingredient  of  parliament  until  1294.  Their  regular  and 
continuous  summons  dates  from  1295. 

§  6.   Position  of  the  Boroughs  in  the  English  System 

The  boroughs  of  England,  like  the  counties,  stood  in  a  double 
relation  to  the  king.  In  very  many  cases  they  were  in  his  demesne, 
and  had  received  their  privileges  as  a  gift  of  purchase  from  him, 
and  in  all  cases  they  were  a  very  important  element  in  taxation. 
Either  then  on  the  feudal  principle  as  demesne  lands,  or  on  the 
political  ground  as  an  influential  part  of  the  nation,  they  stood  on 
a  basis,  not  indeed  so  old  as  that  of  the  county  organization,  but 
in  all  other  respects  scarcely  less  important.  Their  history  tells 
its  own  tale :  beginning  as  demesne  of  a  king  or  of  a  bishop,  abbot, 
or  secular  lord,  they  had  by  the  time  of  the  Conquest  obtained 
recognition,  as  individualities  apart  from  the  body  of  the  counties 
to  which  locally  they  belonged.  They  were,  indeed,  generally 
subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  king  as  his  demesne,  and  not 
included  in  the  corpus  comitatus.  But  the  towns  so  situated  at 
the  time  of  the  Domesday  survey  were  few,  and  even  for  a  century 
after  they  increased  in  number  and  importance  slowly.  Their 
internal  condition  was  but  that  of  any  manor  in  the  country;  the 
reeve  and  his  companions,  the  leet  jury  as  it  was  afterwards  called, 
being  the  magistracy,  and  the  constitution  being  further  strength- 
ened only  by  the  voluntary  association  of  the  local  guild,  whose 
members  would  naturally  furnish  the  counsellors  of  the  leet. 
The  towns  so  administered  were  liable  to  be  called  on  for  talliage 
at  the  will  of  the  lord,  and  the  townsmen  were  in  every  respect, 
except  wealth  and  closeness  of  organization,  in  the  same  condi- 
tion as  the  villeins  of  an  ordinary  demesne. 

K 


130  English  Historians 

The  next  step  taken  in  the  direction  of  emancipation  was  the 
purchase,  by  the  tenants,  of  the  firma  burgi,  that  is,  the  ferm  of 
the  dues  payable  to  the  lord  or  the  king,  within  the  borough; 
instead  of  being  collected  severally  by  the  reeve  or  the  sheriff, 
these  were  compounded  for  by  a  fixed  sum,  which  was  paid  by 
the  burghers  and  reapportioned  amongst  themselves.  The  grant 
of  the  ferm  was  accompanied  by  or  implied  an  act  of  emancipa- 
tion from  villein  services;  and  the  recipients  of  the  grant  were 
the  burghers,  as  members  of  the  leet  or  of  the  guild,  or  in  both 
capacities.  The  burgage  rent  was  apportioned  among  the  houses 
or  tenements  of  the  burghers,  who  thus  became  tenants  in  bur- 
gage  and  on  equality  with  tenants  in  free  and  common  socage. 
The  possessors  of  these  burgages  were,  until  a  further  organiza- 
tion was  provided,  the  political  constituents  of  the  borough. 

The  privileges  of  the  boroughs  had  not  got  much  beyond  this 
at  the  death  of  Henry  I ;  the  burghers  of  Beverly,  who  were  char- 
tered during  his  reign  by  their  lord  the  Archbishop  of  York  with 
the  same  privileges  as  those  enjoyed  by  the  citizens  of  York,  are 
empowered  by  their  charter  to  have  their  hans-htts,  and  there  to 
make  their  by-laws,  and  to  enjoy  certain  immunities  from  tolls 
within  the  shire.  It  is  impossible  to  argue  from  the  privileges  of 
the  city  of  London  to  those  of  the  provincial  towns;  and  in  the 
scarcity  and  uncertainty  of  the  early  charters  there  are  many 
serious  hindrances  to  any  generalization.  Amongst  the  rights 
claimed  by  London  at  this  date  are  those  of  electing  its  own 
sheriff,  of  exemption  from  external  judicature,  freedom  from  several 
specified  imposts,  and  protection  for  corporate  estates.  London, 
however,  can  never  have  been  regarded  as  a  town  in  demesne; 
and  its  privileges,  vested  in  the  powerful  burghers  of  the  free 
city,  served  as  a  model  for  those  which  were  gradually  emancipated. 

Under  Henry  II  we  trace  an  increase  in  the  privileges  recog- 
nized or  granted  by  charter ,  the  king  confirms  the  liberties  enjoyed 
during  the  reigns  of  Edward,  William,  and  Henry  I;  by  special 
privilege  the  villein  who  has  stayed  a  year  and  a  day  in  a  chartered 
town  unclaimed  is  freed  in  perpetuity,  or  the  towns  are  exempted 
from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  sheriff  or  king's  officer.  It  is  only  by 
fine  that  they  obtain  now  and  then  the  right  to  elect  their  own 
officers.  This  and  other  rights  scarcely  less  important  are  occa- 
sionally granted  in  the  charters  of  Richard,  and  commonly  in 
those  of  John,  which  seem  to  recognize  in  the  borough  a  modified 
corporate  character  but  little  short  of  the  later  idea  of  incorpora- 
tion. The  charter  of  John  to  Dunwich  is  especially  full,  be- 


The  Origin  of  Parliament  131 

stowing  the  character  of  a  free  borough,  enumerating  the  rights, 
such  as  sac  and  soc,  in  which  the  burghers  enter  into  the  posses- 
sion of  the  status  before  belonging  to  the  lord  of  the  franchise; 
the  ferm  of  their  town;  immunity  from  all  jurisdiction  except 
that  of  the  king's  justices;  the  right  to  appear  before  the  justices, 
if  summoned,  by  representation  of  twelve  lawful  men,  and  of 
being  assessed  in  case  of  an  amercement  by  a  mixed  jury,  half 
named  out  of  their  own  body.  The  privileges  of  the  towns  ad- 
vanced very  little  farther  than  this  during  the  thirteenth  century; 
but  at  the  beginning  of  it  the  principle  of  representation  and  elec- 
tion was  thus  applied  to  them. 

§  7.   Origin  of  Borough  Representation  in  Parliament 

No  idea  of  summoning  the  towns  to  appear  before  the  king  by 
their  representatives  can  be  traced  higher  than  the  reign  of  John. 
Before  and  after  this  the  richer  tenants  in  burgage  may  have 
occasionally  attended  the  Royal  Councils  with  the  other  freeholders. 
They  would,  however,  have  no  representative  character  whatever ; 
nor  is  there  any  trace  of  their  magistrates,  to  whom  such  a  charac- 
ter would  belong,  being  summoned  to  Parliament,  as  they  were 
to  the  States  General  in  France  by  Philip  the  Fair.  The  first 
notice  of  a  united  representation  occurs  in  1213,  when  John  sum- 
moned the  representatives  of  the  demesne  lands  of  the  crown  to 
estimate  the  compensation  to  be  paid  to  the  plundered  bishops. 
By  a  writ  to  the  sherifi%J:hey  are  directed  to  send  to  S.  Albans 
four  men  and  the  reeve  from  every  township  in  demesne.  In  this 
may  be  distinctly  traced  a  connection  with  the  county  court  rep- 
resentation of  earlier  and  later  times.  The  assembly  so  con- 
stituted met,  and  is  dignified  by  Matthew  Paris  with  the  title  of 
a  council,  the  archbishop,  bishops,  and  magnates  being  present 
at  it.  It  is  indeed  the  assembly  to  which,  through  the  justiciar, 
John  proposed  the  restoration  of  the  laws  of  Henry  I. 

From  this  date,  however,  to  the  Parliament  of  Simon  de  Mont- 
fort,  we  find  no  further  traces ;  nor  can  this  case  be  taken  as  more 
than  pointing  the  way  to  the  later  system.  The  taxation  was  still 
a  matter  of  arrangement  with  the  officers  of  the  Exchequer,  and 
for  no  other  purpose  were  the  towns  likely  to  be  consulted.  The 
summons  of  Simon  de  Montfort  was  directed  to  the  citizens  and 
burghers  of  the  several  cities  and  boroughs,  each  of  which  was  to 
send  two  representatives.  After  the  year  1265  there  is  again  a 
long  blank ;  for  although  in  several  places  the  burghers  are  spoken 


132  English  Historians 

• 

of  as  joining  in  grants  of  money  at  the  king's  request,  it  cannot 
be  shown  that  their  representatives  were  convoked  for  the  pur- 
pose before  the  year  1295.  The  National  Councils  of  1273  a"d 
1283,  and  the  Parliament  of  Shrewsbury,  contained  representatives 
of  the  towns,  but  they  are  not  allowed  by  constitutional  lawyers 
the  full  name  of  Parliaments;  nor  is  it  certain  whether  the  repre- 
sentatives attended  as  representing  an  estate  or  a  part  of  one,  or 
merely  for  the  purpose  of  informing  the  king  and  magnates.  In 
1 294  the  towns  were  asked  for  their  contributions  by  distinct  com- 
missions; in  1295  they  were  summoned  regularly  to  Parliament; 
and  although  the  series  of  writs  is  not  so  complete  in  the  case  of 
the  towns  as  in  that  of  the  counties,  their  right  was  then  recognized, 
their  presence  was  seen  to  be  indispensable,  and  the  representation 
has  been  continuous,  or  nearly  continuous,  ever  since. 

The  great  difference  between  the  representation  of  the  counties 
and  that  of  the  boroughs  is  this,  that  it  was  in  the  power  of  the 
crown  or  its  advisers  to  increase  or  diminish  the  number  of  bor- 
oughs represented  —  a  power  based  on  the  doctrine  that  their 
privilege  was  the  gift  of  the  crown,  and  their  status  historically  that 
of  royal  demesne.  But  their  association  with  the  knights  of  the 
shire,  whose  numbers  could  not  be  altered,  and  whose  possession 
of  their  right  sprang  from  the  more  ancient  part  of  the  constitu- 
tion, prevented  the  third  estate  from  falling  into  the  condition 
into  which  the  corresponding  body  fell  in  Spain,  where  the  custom 
of  summoning  towns  was  adopted  earlier;  and  in  France,  where 
it  was  possibly  imitated  by  Philip  the  Fair  from  the  practice  of 
Edward  I. 

§  8.    Methods  of  Summoning  Parliament 

The  status  of  the  Parliament  was  constituted  by  the  writs  of 
summons,  addressed  to  the  barons  individually,  and  to  the  sheriffs 
for  the  representation  of  the  third  estate.  In  the  latter  case  both 
towns  and  counties  chose  their  representatives  in  the  shire-moot. 
Where  the  particular  form  of  writ  was  not  observed  —  and  both 
for  military  levies  of  the  vassals  and  for  great  councils  a  distinct 
form  was  in  use  —  the  Assembly,  although  it  might  contain  every 
element  of  a  Parliament,  was  not  regarded  as  one.  The  obscurity 
of  our  knowledge  on  this  point,  caused  by  the  loss  of  the  ancient 
writs,  occasions  the  difficulty  that  exists  about  the  Assemblies  of 
the  reign  of  Henry  III  and  of  the  early  years  of  Edward  I,  during 
which  many  councils  were  held  which  contained  certainly  knights 


The  Origin  of  Parliament  133 

of  the  shire,  and  possibly  deputies  from  the  towns,  but  which  are 
called  Great  Councils  rather  than  Parliaments,  for  this  technical 
reason,  —  either  they  contained  other  ingredients  besides  the  regu- 
lar ones  of  Parliament,  or  they  did  not  contain  all  the  ingredients 
of  Parliament ;  or  the  towns  were  summoned  otherwise  than 
through  the  sheriffs ;  or  the  number  of  representatives  varied ;  or 
the  selection  of  the  boroughs  was  irregular;  or  the  purpose  speci- 
fied in  the  writ  was  other  than  parliamentary. 

Such  councils  were  occasionally  held  in  the  succeeding  reigns, 
and  exercised  many  of  the  powers  of  Parliament;  but  taxes  im- 
posed by  them,  and  laws  enacted  by  their  authority,  were  regarded 
as  of  questionable  validity,  and  sometimes  had  to  be  formally 
reenacted.  These  councils  were,  however,  a  part  of  the  process 
by  which  the  institution  of  Parliaments  ripened.  The  regular 
tribunal  of  later  date,  to  which  the  same  name  of  Great  Council 
is  given,  contained  the  lords  spiritual  and  temporal,  the  judges  of 
the  courts,  and  the  other  members  of  the  king's  ordinary  council. 
For  judicial  purposes  it  exercised  a  right  which  Parliament  as  such 
had  not,  and  which  has  descended  from  it  to  the  House  of  Lords 
only.  It  also  advised  the  crown  in  all  matters  of  government, 
although  any  attempt  at  legislation  was  watched  very  jealously 
by  the  commons. 

§  9.    Combination  of  Election  and  Representation 

The  combination  of  the  principle  of  election  with  that  of  rep- 
resentation has  been  illustrated  by  what  precedes.  The  idea  of 
election  was  very  ancient  in  the  nation,  and  had  been  theoretically 
maintained  in  both  the  highest  and  lowest  regions  of  the  polity: 
the  kings  and  prelates  were  supposed  to  be  elected;  the  magis- 
trates of  the  towns,  the  judicial  officers  of  the  counties  and  forests, 
were  really  so  from  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century,  if  not 
before.  In  this,  as  in  every  other  constitutional  point,  the  free- 
dom claimed  and  often  secured  by  the  clergy  served  to  maintain 
the  recollection  or  idea  of  a  right.  In  the  reign  of  Edward  I  the 
lawyers  represented  it  as  an  ancient  Teutonic  right  that  the 
ealdorman,  the  heretoga,  and  the  sheriff  were  elected  officers. 
The  election  of  sheriff  was  claimed  for  the  counties  during  the  par- 
liamentary struggle  which  produced  the  Provisions  of  Oxford,  and 
was  secured  to  the  freeholders  by  the  articuli  super  cartas  in 
1300;  but  the  privilege  was  withdrawn  in  the  next  reign.  The 
two  principles  of  election  and  representation  have  never  been 


IJ4  English  Historians 

divided  in  England  since  the  reign  of  Edward  I,  although  the 
variety  of  franchises  and  disputes  on  the  right  of  voting  for  mem- 
bers of  Parliament  are  for  many  centuries  bewildering  in  the  ex- 
treme. The  towns,  however  close  the  elective  franchise,  have 
never  been,  as  in  France,  represented  by  their  magistrates  as  such. 

§  10.   Powers  of  Parliament 

Of  the  four  normal  powers  of  a  National  Assembly,  the  judicial 
has  never  been  exercised  by  the  Parliament  as  a  parliament.  The 
House  of  Commons  is  not,  either  by  itself  or  in  conjunction  with 
the  House^FCords/ a  court  of  justice;  the  House  of  Lords  has  in- 
herited its  jurisdiction  from  the  Great  Council.  Another  power, 
the  political,  or  right  of  general  deliberation  on  all  national  matters, 
is  too  vague  in  its  extent  to  be  capable  of  being  chronologically 
defined;  nor  was  it  really  vindicated  by  the  Parliament  until  a 
much  later  period  than  that  on  which  we  are  now  employed. 
The  two  most  important  remain,  the  legislative  and  the  laxative, 
the  tracing  of  whose  history  must  complete  our  present  survey. 

§  ii.   Development  of  the  Legislative  Power  o/  Parliament 

The  ancient  theory  that  the  laws  were  made  by  the  king  and 
Witan  coordinately,  if  it  be  an  ancient  theory,  has  within  historic 
times  been  modified  by  the  doctrine  that  the  king  enacted  the 
laws  with  the  counsel  and  consent  of  the  Witan.  This  is  the  most 
ancient  form  existing  in  enactments,  and  is  common  to  the  early 
laws  of  all  the  Teutonic  races;  it  has,  of  course,  always  been  still 
more  modified  in  usage  by  the  varying  power  of  the  king  and  his 
counsellors,  and  by  the  share  that  each  was  strong  enough  to  vindi- 
cate in  the  process.  Until  the  reign  of  John  the  varieties  of  prac- 
tice may  be  traced  chiefly  in  the  form  taken  by  the  law  on  its 
enactment.  The  ancient  laws  are  either  drawn  up  as  codes,  like 
Alfred's,  or  as  amendments  of  customs:  often  we  have  only  the 
bare  abstract  of  them,  the  substance  that  was  orally  transmitted 
from  one  generation  of  Witan  to  another;  where  we  have  them  in 
integrity  the  counsel  and  consent  of  the  Witan  are  specified.  The 
laws  of  the  Norman  kings  are  put  in  the  form  of  charters;  the  king 
in  his  sovereign  capacity  grants  and  confirms  liberties  and  free 
customs  to  his  people,  but  with  the  counsel  and  consent  of  his 
barons  and  faithful. 

Henry  II  issued  most  of   his  enactments  as  edicts  or  assizes. 


The  Origin  of  Parliament  135 

with  a  full  rehearsal  of  the  counsel  and  consent  of  his  archbishops, 
bishops,  abbots,  priors,  earls,  barons,  knights,  and  freeholders. 
The  compact  of  John  with  the  barons  has  the  form  of  a  charter ; 
but,  as  already  stated,  is  really  a  treaty  based  on  articles  proposed 
to  him,  and  containing  additional  articles  to  secure  execution. 
From  the  time  of  John  the  forms  vary,  and  the  reign  of  Henry  III 
contains  statutes  of  every  shape,  —  the  charter,  the  assize,  the 
articles  proposed  and  accepted,  and  the  special  form  of  provisions, 
which  are  analogous  to  the  canons  of  ecclesiastical  councils. 
From  the  reign  of  Edward  I  the  forms  are  those  of  statutes  and 
ordinances,  differing  in  some  ascertained  respects,  the  former 
formally  accepted  in  the  Parliaments  as  laws  of  perpetual  obliga- 
tion, and  enrolled;  the  latter  proceeding  from  the  king  and  his 
council  rather  than  from  the  king  and  Parliament,  being  more 
temporary  in  character,  and  not  enrolled  among  the  statutes.  All 
alike  express  the  counsel  and  consent  with  which  the  king  fortifies 
his  own  enacting  power ;  but  several  of  the  early  statutes  of  Edward 
are  worded  as  if  that  enacting  power  resided  in  the  king  and  his 
ordinary  council;  and  it  is  not  clear  whether  this  assumption  is 
based  on  the  doctrine  of  the  scientific  jurists  who  were  addicted 
to  the  civil  law,  or  on  imitation  of  the  practice  of  the  French  kings 
just  then  made  illustrious  by  the  Establishments  of  St.  Lewis. 

The  actual  force  of  the  expression  "counsel  and  consent," 
which  is  preserved  during  so  long  a  period  and  under  such  various 
developments  of  the  royal  power,  can  only  be  estimated  approxi- 
mately, according  to  the  occasion  or  the  needs  or  the  character 
of  the  sovereign  who  acknowledges  it.  It  stands,  for  at  least  a 
century  after  the  Conquest,  as  the  record  of  a  right  rather  than  the 
expression  of  a  fact.  Under  Henry  II  and  his  descendants,  by 
whom  a  large  share  of  power  was  actually  vested  in  the  ministers 
and  judges,  the  facility  of  consultation  was  much  increased,  but 
it  remains  an  obscure  point,  whether  consent  could  be  withheld 
as  well  as  bestowed,  and  whether  it  was  not  generally  taken  for 
granted. 

From  the  reign  of  Henry  III  it  was  probably  a  reality,  and  from 
that  of  Edward  I  downwards  the  form  has  a  typical  force,  and 
the  variations  later  introduced  into  it  have  a  greal  deal  of  meaning. 
After  the  permanent  incorporation  of  the  commons,  from  1318 
downwards,  the  form  is :  by  the  assent  of  the  prelates,  earls,  barons, 
and  the  commonalty  of  the  realm.  From  the  first  year  of  Edward 
III  the  share  of  the  commons  is  frequently  expressed  as  petition, 
by  the  assent  of  the  prelates,  earls,  and  barons,  and  at  the  request 


136  English  Historians 

of  the  commons;  under  Richard  II  the  assent  is  occasionally 
expressed  as  simply  that  of  the  lords  and  commons.  Henry  IV 
enacts  with  the  advice  and  assent  of  the  lords  at  the  request  of 
the  commons.  In  the  23rd  of  Henry  VI  the  addition  by  author- 
ity of  Parliament  first  occurs;  and  from  the  ist  of  Henry  VII  the 
mention  of  petition  is  dropped,  and  the  regular  form  becomes 
the  advice  and  assent,  or  consent,  of  the  lords  spiritual  and  tem- 
poral and  commons  in  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  authority 
of  the  same.  These  forms,  certainly,  are  not  uniformly  observed ; 
but  the  origin  of  the  changes  may  be  exactly  traced  and  will  be 
found  to  synchronize  with  the  later  changes  in  the  balance  of 
power  between  the  several  estates  and  the  sovereign. 

The  further  question,  Were  the  estates  on  an  equality  in  respect 
of  legislation  ?  may  be  thus  briefly  answered.  The  claim  of  the 
clergy  and  commons  to  a  voice  was  not  admitted  so  early  in  legis- 
lation as  in  the  case  of  taxation :  once  admitted,  the  power  of  the 
commons  very  quickly  eliminated  all  direct  interference  on  the 
part  of  the  clergy.  Down  to  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Edward  I 
it  can  hardly  be  said  that  the  right  of  counsel  was  extended  to  the 
commons  at  all ;  it  is  in  the  next  reign  that  their  power  of  initiation 
by  way  of  petition  is  first  recognized.  As  late  as  the  i8th  of 
Edward  I,  the  statute  quia  emptores  was  passed  by  the  king  and 
barons,  before  the  day  for  which  the  commons  was  summoned. 
As  to  the  clergy,  there  is  no  doubt  either  that  they  exercised  the 
right  of  petition  or  that  the  king  occasionally  made  a  statute  at 
their  request,  with  the  consent  of  the  lords,  and  without  reference 
to  the  commons ;  but  acts  so  sanctioned  were  not  regarded  by  the 
lawyers  as  of  full  authority,  and  are  relegated,  perhaps  rightly, 
to  the  class  of  ordinances.  Possibly  the  royal  theory  was  that  the 
right  of  petition  belonged  to  both  clergy  and  commons,  whilst 
the  counsel  and  consent  of  the  lords  only  was  indispensable.  It 
was  not  until  the  i5th  of  Edward  II  that  the  voice  of  Parliament, 
when  revoking  the  acts  of  the  ordainers,  distinctly  enunciated  the 
principle  that  all  matters  to  be  established  for  the  estate  of  the  king 
and  people  "shall  be  treated,  accorded,  and  established  in  Par- 
liaments by  the  king  and  by  the  assent  of  the  prelates,  earls,  barons, 
and  commonalty  of  the  realm,  according  as  it  hath  been  hitherto 
accustomed." 

The  growth  of  the  right  of  the  commons  may  be  traced  in  the 
forms  of  the  writs:  in  those  of  John,  the  knights  of  the  shire  are 
summoned  simply  ad  loquendum;  those  of  Simon  de  Montfort 
describe  them  as  tractaturi  el  consilium  impcnsuri;  ad  tractandum 


The  Origin  of  Parliament  137 

as  well  as  ad  consulendum  et  consentiendum  being  the  form  of  sum- 
mons usual  in  the  case  of  a  Great  Council.  Edward  I,  in  1283,  sum- 
mons the  representatives  of  the  towns  ad  audiendum  et  faciendum; 
in  1294  he  summons  the  knights  of  the  shire  ad  consulendum  et 
consentiendum,  pro  se  et  communitate  ilia,  Us  qu<z  comites,  barones, 
et  proceres  pmdicti  ordinaverint,  with  which  agrees  the  fact  that, 
in  1290,  they  were  not  .assembled  until  the  legislative  part  of  the 
work  of  the  Parliament  had  been  transacted.  From  the  year  1295, 
however,  the  form  is  ad  faciendum;  under  Edward  II  it  be- 
comes ad  consentiendum  et  faciendum,  to  assent  and  enact. 
From  this  time,  then,  the  commons  were  admitted  to  a  share  of 
the  character  of  the  sapientes,  which  in  this  respect  the  bishops 
and  barons  had  engrossed  since  the  Conquest,  and  the  king  was 
enabled  to  state  with  truth,  as  Edward  I  did  to  the  pope,  that  the 
custom  of  England  was,  that  in  business  affecting  the  state  of  the 
kingdom  the  counsel  of  all  whom  the  matter  touched  should  be 
required.  The  corresponding  variations  in  the  pramunientes 
clause  summoning  the  clergy  are:  in  1295,  ad  tractandum,  ordi- 
nandum,  et  faciendum;  in  1299,  ad  faciendum  et  consentiendum; 
from  1381,  only  ad  consentiendum,  a  function  adequately  dis- 
charged by  absence. 

§  12.   Connection  between  Taxation  and  Representation 

The  share  of  the  commons  in  taxation  takes  precedence  of  their 
share  in  legislation.  The  power  of  voting  money  was  more  neces- 
sary than  that  of  giving  counsel.  Of  this  power,  as  it  existed  up 
to  the  date  of  Magna  Carta,  enough  has  been  said.  The  witen- 
agemot  and  its  successor,  the  royal  council  of  barons,  could  impose 
the  old  national  taxes ;  the  ordinary  feudal  exactions  were  matters 
of  common  law  and  custom,  and  the  amount  of  them  was  limited 
by  usage.  But  the  extraordinary  aids  which  Henry  II  and  his 
sons  substituted  for  the  Danegeld,  and  the  taxes  on  the  demesne 
lands  of  the  crown,  were  arbitrary  in  amount  and  incidence;  the 
former  clearly  requiring,  and  the  latter,  on  all  moral  grounds,  not 
less  demanding,  an  act  of  consent  on  the  part  of  the  payers.  This 
right  was  early  recognized;  even  John,  as  we  have  seen,  asked  his 
barons  sometimes  for  grants,  and  treated  with  the  demesne  lands 
and  towns  through  the  Exchequer,  with  the  clergy  through  the 
bishops  and  archdeacons. 

Magna  Carta  enunciates  the  principle  that  the  payers  shall  be 
called  to  the  common  "council  to  vote  the  aids  which  had  been 


138  English   Historians 

previously  negotiated  separately;  but  the  clause  was  never  con  firmed 
by  Henry  III,  nor  was  it  applicable  to  the  talliage  of  demesne. 
It  is  as  the  towns  begin  to  increase,  and  at  the  same  time  taxation 
ceases  to  be  based  solely  on  land  and  begins  to  affect  personal  as 
well  as  real  property,  that  the  difficulties  of  the  king  and  the  hard- 
ships of  the  estates  liable  to  talliage  become  important.  The 
steps  by  which  the  king  was  compelled  to  give  up  the  right  of  taking 
money  without  a  parliamentary  grant,  are  the  same  as  those  which 
led  to  the  confirmation  of  the  charters  by  Edward  I.  It  was  virtu- 
ally surrendered  in  the  clause  then  conceded  in  addition  to  the 
charter,  which  is  commonly  known  under  the  form  of  the  articles, 
de  tallagio  non  concedendo.  And  this  completed  the  laxative 
powers  of  Parliament.  The  further  steps  of  development,  the 
determination  of  the  different  proportions  in  which  the  various 
branches  of  the  three  estates  voted  their  supplies,  and  the  final 
engrossing  of  the  taxing  power  by  the  House  of  Commons,  the 
struggles  by  which  the  grants  were  made  to  depend  on  the  redress 
of  grievances,  and  the  determination  of  the  disposal  of  supplies 
assumed  by  the  Parliament,  belong  to  later  history. 

We  have  thus  brought  our  sketch  of  constitutional  history  to 
the  point  of  time  at  which  the  nation  may  be  regarded  as  reaching 
its  full  stature.  It  has  not  yet  learned  its  strength,  nor  accustomed 
itself  to  economize  its  power.  To  trace  the  process  by  which  it 
learned  the  full  strength  of  its  organism, —  by  which  it  learned 
to  use  its  powers  and  forces  with  discrimination  and  effect  J"  to 
act  easily,  effectually,  and  economically;  or,  to  use  another  meta- 
phor, to  trace  the  gradual  wear  of  the  various  parts  of  the  machin- 
ery, until  all  roughness  was  smoothed,  and  all  that  was  superfluous, 
entangling,  and  confusing  was  got  rid  of,  and  the  balance  of  forces 
adjusted,  and  action  made  manageable  and  intelligible,  and  the 
power  of  adaptation  to  change  of  circumstances  fully  realized,  — 
is  the  story  of  later  politics,  of  a  process  that  is  still  going  on,  and 
must  go  on  as  the  age  advances,  and  men  are  educated  into  wider 
views  of  government,  national  unity,  and  political  responsibility. 
We  stop,  however,  with  Edward  I,  because  the  machinery  is  now 
completed,  the  people  are  at  fulfgrowth.  The  system  is  raw  and 
untrained  and  awkward,  but  it  is  complete.  The  attaining  of  this 
point  is  to  be  attributed  to  the  defining  genius,  the  political  wisdom, 
and  the  honesty  of  Edward  I,  building  on  the  immemorial  foun- 
dation of  national  custom ;  fitting  together  all  that  Henry  I  had 
planned,  Henry  II  had  organized,  and  the  heroes  of  the  thirteenth 
century  had  inspired  with  fresh  life  and  energy. 


The  Origin  of  Parliament  139 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Baldwin,  Early  Records  oj  the  King's  Council,  in  the  American  Historical 
Review,  October,  1905.  Gneist,  History  of  the  English  Constitution,  chaps, 
xxiv-xxv.  Hearn,  The  Government  oj  England,  chaps,  xvi-xviii.  Pollock  and 
Maitland,  History  of  English  Law,  Vol.  I,  Bk.  II,  chap,  iii,  for  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  county  and  borough.  Pike,  Constitutional  History  oj  the  House 
of  Lords.  Stubbs,  Lectures  on  Early  English  History,  chaps,  xvii  and  xviii. 
For  the  illustrative  documents  consult  the  Pennsylvania  Translations  and 
Reprints,  Vol.  I,  no.  6. 


CHAPTER  VH 

GROWTH   OF   PARLIAMENTARY  POWERS 

IT  was  a  long  time  after  the  Model  Parliament  of  Edward  I 
before  Parliament  took  on  a  definite  form  of  two  houses,  each  with 
its  settled  customs  and  rules  of  procedure.  A  general  account  of 
this  further  development  will  be  found  in  almost  any  good  text- 
book, especially  in  Mr.  Medley's  excellent  manual,  English  Con- 
stitutional History,  chapter  iv.  While  tracing  the  evolution  of 
the  forms  of  Parliament,  the  student  must  also  observe  an  equally 
important  process,  that  is,  the  development  of  the  powers  of  the 
respective  houses,  not  in  an  abstract  fashion,  but  always  in  relation 
to  concrete  contemporary  events.  Originating  as  a  feudal  and 
taxing  body,  Parliament,  in  the  struggle  with  the  kings,  attempted 
to  control  not  only  the  amount  and  form  of  taxes,  but  also  their 
expenditure.  Furthermore,  Parliament  contended  for  the  right  to 
make  new  laws  and  restrain  the  king  from  arbitrary  action  in  this 
sphere  also.  The  methods  by  which  these  various  claims  to  power 
were  made  effective  are  elaborately  discussed  by  Dr.  Stubbs  in 
the  seventeenth  chapter  of  his  Constitutional  History,  from  which 
only  a  few  passages  can  be  given  here. 

§  i.   Parliamentary  Control  0}  Royal  Ministers* 

The  idea  of  controlling  expenditure  and  securing  the  redress 
of  all  administrative  abuses  by  maintaining  a  hold  upon  the  king's 
ministers,  and  even  upon  the  king  himself,  appears  in  our  history, 
as  soon  as  the  nation  begins  to  assert  its  constitutional  rights,  in 
the  executory  clauses  of  the  Great  Charter.  Three  methods  of 
attaining  the  end  proposed  recommended  themselves  at  different 

1  Stubbs,  Constitutional  History  of  England,  Vol.  II,  chap.  xvii.  By  per- 
mission of  the  Delegates  of  the  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford. 

140 


Growth  of  Parliamentary   Powers  141 

times:  these  are  analogous,  in  the  case  of  the  ministers,  to  the 
different  methods  by  which,  under  various  systems,  the  nation  has 
attempted  to  restrain  the  exercise  of  royal  power;  the  rule  of 
election,  the  tie  of  the  coronation  oath,  and  the  threats  of  deposi- 
tion ;  and  they  are  liable  to  the  same  abuses. 

The  scheme  of  limiting  the  irresponsible  power  of  the  king  by 
the  election  of  the  great  officers  of  state  in  Parliament  has  already 
been  referred  to  as  one  of  the  results  of  the  long  minority  of  Henry 
III.  It  was  in  close  analogy  with  the  practice  of  election  to  bishop- 
rics and  abbacies,  and  to  the  theory  of  royal  election  itself.  When, 
in  1244  and  several  succeeding  years,  the  barons  claimed  the  right 
of  choosing  the  justiciar,  chancellor,  and  treasurer,  they  probably 
intended  that  the  most  capable  man  should  be  chosen,  and  that 
his  appointment  should  be,  if  not  for  life,  at  least  revocable  only 
by  the  consent  of  the  nation  in  Parliament.  The  king  saw  more 
clearly  perhaps  than  the  barons  that  his  power  thus  limited  would 
be  a  burden  rather  than  a  dignity,  and  that  no  king  worthy  of  the 
name  could  consent  to  be  deprived  of  all  freedom  of  action.  Henry 
III  pertinaciously  resisted  the  proposal,  and  it  was  never  even 
made  to  Edward  I,  although  in  one  instance  he  was  requested  to 
dismiss  an  unpopular  treasurer.  Revived  under  Edward  II,  in 
the  thirteenth  and  following  articles  of  the  Ordinances,  and  exer- 
cised by  the  ordainers  when  they  were  in  power,  it  was  defeated 
or  dropped  under  Edward  III;  in  1341  the  commons  demanded 
that  a  fresh  nomination  of  ministers  should  be  made  in  every  Par- 
liament; Edward  agreed,  but  repudiated  the  concession. 

It  was  naturally  enough  again  brought  forward  in  the  minority 
of  Richard  II.  The  commons  petitioned  in  his  first  Parliament 
that  the  chancellor,  treasurer,  chief  justices  and  chief  baron,  the 
steward  and  treasurer  of  the  household,  the  chamberlain,  privy 
seal,  and  wardens  of  the  forests  on  each  side  of  the  Trent,  might 
be  appointed  in  Parliament;  and  the  petition  was  granted  and 
embodied  in  an  ordinance  for  the  period  of  the  king's  minority. 
In  1380  the  commons  again  urged  that  the  five  principal  ministers, 
the  chancellor,  treasurer,  privy  seal,  chamberlain,  and  steward  of 
the  household  should  be  elected  in  Parliament,  and  that  the  five 
chosen  in  the  present  Parliament  might  not  be  removed  before  the 
next  session ;  the  king  replied  by  reference  to  the  ordinance  made  in 
1377.  In  1381  they  prayed  that  the  king  would  appoint  as  chan- 
cellor the  most  efficient  person  he  could  find,  whether  spiritual 
or  temporal;  in  1383  that  he  would  employ  sage,  honest,  and  dis- 
creet counsellors;  and  in  1385  he  had  to  decline  summarily  to 


142  English  Historians 

name  the  officers  whom  he  intended  to  employ  "for  the  comfort 
of  the  commons." 

But  it  may  be  questioned  whether  under  the  most  favorable 
circumstances  the  right  claimed  was  really  exercised ;  the  commons 
seem  generally  to  have  been  satisfied  when  the  king  announced 
his  nomination  in  Parliament,  and  to  have  approved  it  without 
question.  The  appointments  made  by  Edward  II  in  opposition 
to  the  ordainers,  when  he  removed  their  nominees  and  appointed 
his  own,  were  acts  of  declared  hostility,  and  equivalent  to  a  dec- 
laration of  independence.  The  ultimate  failure  of  a  pretension, 
maintained  on  every  opportunity  for  a  century  and  a  half,  would 
seem  to  prove  that,  however  in  theory  it  may  have  been  compatible 
with  the  idea  of  a  limited  monarchy,  it  was  found  practically  im- 
possible to  maintain  it ;  the  personal  influence  of  the  king  would 
overbear  the  authority  of  any  ordinary  minister,  and  the  minister 
who  could  overawe  the  king  would  be  too  dangerous  for  the  peace 
of  the  realm.  The  privy  council  records  of  Richard  II  show 
that  even  with  the  ministers  of  his  own  selection  the  king  did  not 
always  get  his  own  way. 

§  2.   Control  through  the  Oath  of  Office 

A  second  expedient  was  tried  in  the  oath  of  office,  an  attempt 
to  bind  the  conscience  of  the  minister  which  belongs  especially 
to  the  age  of  clerical  officials.  The  forms  of  oath  prescribed  by 
the  Provisions  of  Oxford  illustrate  this  method,  but  there  is  no 
reason  to  suppose  that  it  was  then  first  adopted.  The  oath  of  the 
sheriffs  and  of  the  King's  counsellors  is  probably  much  more 
ancient,  and  the  king's  own  oath  much  older  still.  The  system 
is  open  to  the  obvious  objection  which  lies  against  all  such  obliga- 
tions, that  they  are  not  requisite  to  bind  a  good  minister  or  strong 
enough  to  bind  a  bad  one;  but  they  had  a  certain  directive  force, 
and  in  ages  in  which  the  reception  of  money-gifts,  whether  as 
bribes  or  thank-offerings,  was  common  and  little  opposed  to  the 
moral  sense  of  the  time,  it  was  an  advantage  that  the  public  ser- 
vants should  know  that  they  could  not  without  breach  of  faith 
use  their  official  (position  for  the  purpose  of  avarice  or  self- 
aggrandizement. 

But  when  we  find  the  best  of  our  kings  believing  themselves 
relieved  from  the  obligation  of  an  oath  by  absolution,  we  can 
scarcely  think  that  such  a  bond  was  likely  to  secure  good  faith  in  a 
minister  trained  in  ministerial  habits,  ill-paid  for  his  services,  and 


Growth   of  Parliamentary   Powers  143 

anxious  to  make  his  position  a  stepping-stone  to  higher  and  safer 
preferment.  It  is  seldom  that  the  oath  of  the  minister  appears 
as  an  effective  pledge;  the  lay  ministers  of  Edward  III,  in  1341, 
allowed  their  master  to  make  use  of  their  sworn  obligation  to  in- 
validate the  legislation  of  Parliament  and  to  enable  him  to  excuse 
his  own  repudiation  of  his  word.  Generally  the  oath  only  appears 
as  an  item  among  the  charges  against  a  fallen  or  falling  minister, 
against  whom  perjury  seems  a  convenient  allegation. 

§  3.   Punishment  and  Admonition  of  Ministers;  Origin  in  Royal 

Practice 

The  third  method  was  rather  an  expedient  for  punishment  and 
warning  than  a  scheme  for  enforcing  ministerial  good  behavior ;  it 
was  the  calling  of  the  public  servant  to  account  for  his  conduct 
whilst  in  office.  In  this  point  the  Parliament  reaped  the  benefit 
of  the  experience  of  the  kings,  and  did  it  easily,  for,  as  the  whole 
of  the  administrative  system  of  the  government  sprang  out  of  the 
economic  action  of  the  Norman  court,  a  strict  routine  of  account 
and  acquittance  had  been  immemorially  maintained.  The  annual 
audits  of  the  Exchequer  had  produced  the  utmost  minuteness  in 
public  accounts,  such  as  have  been  quoted  as  illustrating  the  finan- 
cial condition  of  England  under  Edward  I.  Minute  bookkeeping, 
however,  does  not  secure  official  honesty,  as  the  Norman  kings  were 
well  aware;  the  sale  of  the  great  offices  of  state,  common  under 
Henry  I  and  tolerated  even  under  Henry  II,  shows  that  the  kings 
were  determined  that  their  ministers  should  have  a  consider- 
able stake  in  their  own  good  conduct ;  a  chancellor  who  had  paid 
£10,000  for  the  seals  was  not  likely  to  forfeit  them  for  the  sake  of  a 
petty  malversation  which  many  rivals  would  be  ready  to  detect. 

On  the  other  hand  the  kings  possessed,  in  the  custom  of  mulcting 
a  discharged  official,  —  a  custom  which  was  not  peculiar  to  the 
Oriental  monarchies,  • —  an  expedient  which  could  be  applied  to 
more  than  one  purpose.  Henry  II  had  used  the  accounts  of  the 
chancery  as  one  of  the  means  by  which  he  revenged  himself  on 
Becker.  Richard  I  had  compelled  his  father's  servants  to  repur- 
chase their  offices,  and  the  greatest  of  them,  Ranulph  Glanville, 
he  had  forced  to  ransom  himself  with  an  enormous  fine.  The 
minister  who  had  worn  out  the  king's  patience,  or  had  restrained 
his  arbitrary  will,  could  be  treated  in  the  same  way.  Hubert  de 
Burgh  had  been  a  good  servant  to  Henry  III,  but  the  king  could 
not  resist  the  temptation  to  plunder  him.  Edward  I  again  seems 


144  English  Historians 

to  have  considered  that  the  judges  whom  he  displaced  in  1290 
were  rehabilitated  by  the  payment  of  a  fine  —  a  fact  which  shows 
that  the  line  was  not  very  sharply  drawn  between  the  lawful 
and  unlawful  profits  of  office.  Edward  II  revenged  himself  on 
Walter  Langton,  Edward  III  vented  his  irritation  on  the  Stratfords, 
John  of  Gaunt  attacked  William  of  Wykeham  with  much  the 
same  weapons,  and  in  each  case  the  minister  assailed  neither  in- 
curred deep  disgrace  nor  precluded  himself  from  a  return  to  favor. 
Such  examples  taught  the  nation  the  first  lessons  of  the  doctrine 
of  ministerial  responsibility.  Great  as  were  the  offences  of  Ed- 
ward II,  Stapledon  the  treasurer  and  Baldock  the  chancellor 
were  the  more  immediate  and  direct  objects  of  national  indig- 
nation ;  they  were  scarcely  less  hated  than  the  Dispensers,  and 
shared  their  fate.  The  Kentish  rioters  or  revolutionists  of  1381 
avenged  their  wrongs  on  the  chancellor  and  treasurer,  even  whilst 
they  administered  to  the  Londoners  generally  the  oath  of  fealty 
to  King  Richard  and  the  commons. 

§  4.   Instances  of  Impeachment 

But  it  is  in  the  transactions  of  the  Good  Parliament  that  this 
principle  first  takes  its  constitutional  form ;  kings  and  barons  had 
used  it  as  a  cloak  for  their  vindictive  or  aggressive  hostility ;  the  com- 
mons first  applied  it  to  the  remedy  of  public  evils.  The  impeach- 
ment of  Lord  Latimer,  Lord  Neville,  Richard  Lyons,  Alice  Ferrers, 
and  the  rest  of  the  dishonest  courtiers  of  Edward  III,  is  thus  a 
most  significant  historical  landmark.  The  cases  of  Latimer  and 
Neville  are  the  most  important,  for  they,  as  chamberlain  and 
steward,  filled  two  of  the  chief  offices  of  the  household;  but  the 
association  of  the  other  agents  and  courtiers  in  their  condemnation 
shows  that  the  commons  were  already  prepared  to  apply  the  newly 
found  weapon  in  a  still  more  trenchant  way,  not  merely  to  secure 
official  honesty,  but  to  remedy  all  public  abuses  even  when  and 
where  they  touched  the  person  of  the  king,  and  moreover  to  secure 
that  public  servants  once  found  guilty  of  dishonest  conduct  should 
not  be  employed  again.  As  the  grand  jury  of  the  nation,  the 
sworn  recognitors  of  national  rights  and  grievances,  they  thus 
entered  on  the  most  painful  but  not  the  least  needful  of  their 
functions. 

The  impeachment  of  Michael  de  la  Pole  in  1386  and  of  Sir 
Simon  Burley  and  his  companions  in  1388  was  the  work  of  the 
commons.  It  is  to  be  distinguished  carefully  from  the  proceedings 


Growth  of  Parliamentary  Powers  145 

of  the  lords  appellant,  which  were  indefensible  on  moral  or  political 
grounds,  for  there  the  guilt  of  the  accused  was  not  proved,  and  the 
form  of  proceeding  against  them  was  not  sanctioned  by  either  law 
or  equity.  But  the  lesson  which  it  conveyed  was  full  of  instruction 
and  warning.  The  condemnation  of  Michael  de  la  Pole  especially 
showed  that  the  great  officers  of  state  must  henceforth  regard  them- 
selves as  responsible  to  the  nation,  not  to  the  king  only.  The 
condemnation  of  the  favorites  proved  that  no  devotion  to  the  per- 
son of  the  king  could  justify  the  subject  in  disobeying  the  law  of 
the  land,  or  even  in  disregarding  the  principles  of  the  constitution 
as  they  were  now  asserting  themselves.  The  cruelty  and  vindic- 
tiveness  of  these  prosecutions  must  be  charged  against  the  lords 
appellant  who  prompted  the  commons  to  institute  them ;  the  com- 
mons, however,  were  taught  their  own  strength  even  by  its  misuse. 
And  still  more  terribly  was  the  lesson  impressed  upon  them  when 
Richard's  hour  of  vengeance  came,  and  they  were  employed  to 
impeach  Archbishop  Arundel,  ostensibly  for  his  conduct  as  chan- 
cellor and  for  his  participation  in  the  cruelties  of  which  their  prede- 
cessors in  the  House  of  Commons  had  been  the  willing  instru- 
ments, but  really  that  they  might  in  alliance  with  the  king  complete 
the  reprisals  due  for  the  work  in  which  they  had  shared  with  the 
appellants.  The  dangerous  facility  with  which  the  power  of  im- 
peachment might  be  wielded  seems  to  have  daunted  the  advo- 
cates of  national  right;  the  commons  as  an  estate  of  the  realm 
joyfully  acquiesced  in  the  change  of  dynasty,  but,  by  subsequently 
protesting  that  the  judgments  of  Parliament  belonged  to  the  king 
and  lords  only,  they  attempted  to  avoid  responsibility  for  the 
judicial  proceedings  taken  against  the  unhappy  Richard.  .  .  . 

§  5.  Acquisition  of  Control  through  Financial  Restraint 

The  command  of  the  national  purse  was  the  point  on  which 
the  claims  of  the  nation  and  the  prerogative  of  the  king  came  most 
frequently  into  collision  both  directly  and  indirectly ;  the  demand 
that  the  king  should  live  of  his  own,  was  the  most  summary  and 
comprehensive  of  the  watchwords  by  which  the  constitutional 
struggle  was  guided,  and  the  ingenuity  of  successive  kings  and 
ministers  was  taxed  to  the  utmost  in  contriving  evasions  of  a  rule 
which  recommended  itself  to  the  common  sense  of  the  nation. 
But  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  either  the  nation  or  its  leaders, 
when  once  awakened,  looked  with  less  jealousy  on  the  royal 
pretensions  to  legislate,  to  resist  all  reforms  of  administrative 


146  English  Historians 

procedure,  to  interfere  with  the  ordinary  process  of  law,  or  to 
determine  by  the  fiat  of  the  king  alone  the  course  of  national  policy. 
On  these  points,  perhaps,  they  had  an  easier  victory,  because 
the  special  struggles  turned  generally  on  the  question  of  money; 
but  though  easier,  it  was  not  the  less  valuable.  There  is,  indeed, 
this  distinction,  that  whilst  some  of  the  kings  set  a  higher  value 
than  others  on  these  powers  and  on  the  prerogatives  that  were 
connected  with  them,  money  was  indispensable  to  all.  The  ad- 
mission of  the  right  of  Parliament  to  legislate,  to  inquire  into  abuses, 
and  to  share  in  the  guidance  of  national  policy  was  practically 
purchased  by  the  money  granted  to  Edward  I  and  Edward  III, 
although  Edward  I  had  a  just  theory  of  national  unity,  and 
Edward  III  exercised  little  more  political  foresight  than  prompted 
him  to  seek  the  acquiescence  of  the  nation  in  his  own  schemes. 

It  has  been  well  said  that  although  the  English  people  have  never 
been  slow  to  shed  their  blood  in  defence  of  liberty,  most  of  the 
limitations  by  which  at  different  times  they  have  succeeded  in 
binding  the  royal  power  have  been  purchased  with  money,  many 
of  them  by  stipulated  payments,  in  the  offering  and  accepting  of 
which  neither  party  saw  anything  to  be  ashamed  of.  The  con- 
firmation of  the  charters  in  1225  by  Henry  III  contains  a  straight- 
forward admission  of  the  fact,  "for  this  concession  and  the  gift 
of  these  liberties  and  those  contained  in  the  charter  of  the  forests, 
the  archbishops,  bishops,  abbots,  priors,  earls,  barons,  knights, 
freeholders,  and  all  men  of  the  realm  granted  us  a  fifteenth  part  of 
all  their  movable  goods."  The  charter  of  the  national  liberties 
was  in  fact  drawn  up  just  like  the  charter  of  a  privileged  town.  In 
1297  Edward  I,  in  equally  plain  terms,  recognized  the  price  which 
he  had  taken  for  the  renewal  of  the  charter  of  his  father.  In 
1301,  at  Lincoln,  the  barons  on  behalf  of  the  whole  community 
told  the  king  that  if  their  demands  were  granted  they  would  increase 
their  gift  from  a  twentieth  to  a  fifteenth';  in  1310  they  told- Edward 
II  that  they  had  by  the  gift  of  a  twentieth  purchased  relief  from 
prizes  and  other  grievances;  in  1339  the  king  informed  the  com- 
mons, by  way  of  inducing  them  to  be  liberal,  that  the  chancellor 
was  empowered  to  grant  some  favors  to  the  nation  in  general, 
as  grantz  et  as  petitz  de  la  commune,  to  which  they  replied  in  the 
next  session  that  if  their  conditions  were  not  fulfilled,  they  would 
not  be  bound  to  grant  the  aid.  The  rehearsal,  in  the  statutes  of 
1340  and  later  years,  of  the  conditions  on  which  the  money  grants 
of  those  years  were  bestowed,  shows  that  the  idea  was  familiar. 
It  furnished,  in  fact,  a  practical  solution  of  difficult  questions, 


Growth  of  Parliamentary   Powers  147 

which  in  theory  were  insoluble.  The  king  had  rights  as  lord  of 
his  people,  the  people  had  rights  as  freemen  and  as  estates  of  the 
realm  which  the  king  personified;  the  definition  of  the  rights  of 
each,  in  theory  most  difficult,  became  practically  easy  when  it  was 
reduced  to  a  question  of  bargain  and  sale. 

§  6.   Grants  o)  Money  and  Redress  of  Grievances 

As  year  by  year  the  royal  necessities  became  greater,  more  com- 
plete provision  was  made  for  the  declaration  of  the  national 
demands.  The  presentation  of  gravamina  was  made  an  invari- 
able preliminary  to  the  discussion  of  a  grant ;  the  redress  of  griev- 
ances was  the  condition  of  the  grant,  and  the  actual  remedy,  the 
execution  of  the  conditions;  the  fulfilment  of  the  promises,  the 
actual  delivery  of  the  purchased  right,  became  the  point  on  which 
the  crisis  of  constitutional  progress  turned.  Except  in  cases  of 
great  and  just  irritation,  an  aid  was  never  refused.  When  it  was 
made  conditional  on  redress  of  grievances,  the  royal  promise  was 
almost  necessarily  accepted  as  conclusive  on  the  one  side,  the 
money  was  paid,  the  promise  might  or  might  not  be  kept. 

Especially  where  the  grievance  was  caused  by  maladministra- 
tion rather  than  by  the  fault  of  the  law,  it  was  impossible  to  exact 
the  remedy  before  the  price  was  paid.  Even  under  Henry  IV  the 
claim  made  by  the  commons,  that  the  petitions  should  be  answered 
before  the  subsidy  was  granted,  was  refused  as  contrary  to  the 
practice  of  Parliament.  Thus  the  only  security  for  redress  was  the 
power  of  refusing  money  when  it  was  next  asked,  a  power  which 
might  again  be  met  by  insincere  promises  or  by  obstinate  per- 
sistence in  misgovernment  which  would  ultimately  lead  to  civil 
war.  The  idea  of  making  supply  depend  upon  the  actual  redress 
could  only  be  realized  under  a  system  of  government  for  which  the 
nations  of  Europe  were  not  yet  prepared — under  that  system  of 
limited  monarchy  secured  by  ministerial  responsibility,  towards 
which  England  at  least  was  feeling  her  way. 

§  7.   Formal  Reception  of  Petitions  by  the  King 

It  was  under  Edward  III  that  it  became  a  regular  form  at  the 
opening  of  Parliament  for  the  chancellor  to  declare  the  king's 
willingness  to  hear  the  petitions  of  his  people ;  all  who  had  griev- 
ances were  to  bring  them  to  the  foot  of  the  throne  that  the  king 
with  the  advice  of  his  council  or  of  the  lords  might  redress  them ; 


148  English  Historians 

but  the  machinery  for  receiving  and  considering  such  petitions 
as  came  from  private  individuals  or  separate  communities  was 
perfected,  as  we  have  seen,  by  Edward  I.  Petitions,  however,  for 
the  redress  of  national  grievances  run  back  to  earlier  precedents, 
and  these  became,  almost  immediately  on  the  completion  of  the 
parliamentary  system  in  1295,  the  most  important  part  of  the  work 
of  the  session.  The  articles  of  the  barons  of  1215,  the  petition  of 
1258,  the  bill  of  articles  presented  at  Lincoln  in  1301,  the  petitions 
of  1309  and  1310,  were  the  precedents  for  the  long  list  of  petitions, 
sometimes  offered  by  the  estates  together  or  in  pairs,  but  most 
frequently  by  the  commons  alone. 

These  petitions  fill  the  greatest  part  of  the  Rolls  of  Parliament; 
they  include  all  personal  and  political  complaints,  they  form  the 
basis  of  the  conditions  of  money  grants,  and  of  nearly  all  adminis- 
trative and  statutory  reforms.  They  are,  however,  still  petitions, 
prayers  for  something  which  the  king  will,  on  consultation  with  the 
lords  or  council,  give  or  withhold,  and  on  which  his  answer  is 
definitive,  whether  he  gives  it  as  the  supreme  legislator  or  as  the 
supreme  administrator,  by  reference  to  the  courts"  of  law,  or  by  an 
ordinance  framed  to  meet  the  particular  case  brought  before  him, 
or  by  the  making  of  a  new  law. 

In  the  first  of  these  cases,  the  reference  of  petitions  addressed 
to  the  king,  to  the  special  tribunal  to  which  they  should  be  sub- 
mitted, need  not  be  further  discussed  at  this  point.  It  has,  as 
has  been  pointed  out  in  an  earlier  chapter,  a  bearing  on  the  history 
of  the  judicature,  the  development  of  the  chancery,  and  the  juris- 
diction of  the  king  in  council;  but,  except  when  the  commons 
take  an  opportunity  of  reminding  the  king  of  the  incompleteness 
of  the  arrangements  for  hearing  petitions,  or  when  they  suggest 
improvements  in  the  proceedings,  it  does  not  much  concern  par- 
liamentary history;  although  the  commons  make  it  a  part  of  their 
business  to  see  that  the  private  petitions  are  duly  considered,  the 
judicial  power  of  the  lords  is  not  shared  by  the  commons  nor  is 
action  upon  the  petition  which  requires  judicial  redress  ever  made 
a  condition  of  a  money  grant. 

§  8.    Petition,  Ordinance,  and  Legislation 

The  other  two  cases  are  directly  and  supremely  important. 
Whether  the  king  redresses  grievances  by  ordinance  or  by  statute, 
he  is  really  acting  as  a  legislator.  Although  in  one  case  he  acts 
with  the  advice  of  his  council  and  in  the  other  by  the  counsel  and 


Growth  of  Parliamentary  Powers  149 

consent  of  the  estates  of  the  realm,  the  enacting  power  is  his ;  no 
advice  or  consent  of  Parliament  can  make  a  statute  without  him; 
even  if  the  law  is  his  superior,  and  he  has  sworn  to  maintain  the 
law  which  his  people  shall  have  chosen,  there  is  no  constitutional 
machinery  which  compels  him  to  obey  the  law  or  observe  his  oath. 
More  particularly,  he  is  the  framer  of  the  law  which  the  advice 
or  consent  of  the  nation  has  urged  or  assisted  him  to  make;  he 
turns  the  petitions  of  the  commons  into  statutes  or  satisfies  them 
by  ordinance ;  he  interprets  the  petitions  and  interprets  the  statutes 
formed  upon  them.  By  his  power,  too,  of  making  ordinances  in 
council  he  claims  the  power  not  only  to  supply  the  imperfections 
of  the  statute  law,  but  to  suspend  its  general  operation,  to  make 
particular  exceptions  to  its  application,  to  abolish  it  altogether 
where  it  is  contrary  to  his  prerogative  right.  Many  of  these 
powers  and  claims  are  so  intimately  bound  up  with  the  accepted 
theory  of  legislation  that  they  cannot  be  disentangled  without 
great  difficulty,  and  in  some  points  the  struggle  necessarily  ends  in 
a  compromise. 

Nearly  the  whole  of  the  legislation  of  the  fourteenth  century  is 
based  upon  the  petitions  of  Parliament.  Some  important  develop- 
ments of  administrative  process  grew  out  of  the  constructive  legis- 
lation of  Edward  I,  and  were  embodied  in  acts  of  Parliament  as 
well  as  in  ordinances;  but  a  comparison  of  the  Rolls  of  Parlia- 
ment with  the  Statute  Book  proves  that  the  great  bulk  of  the  new 
laws  were  initiated  by  the  estates  and  chiefly  by  the  commons. 
Hence  the  importance  of  the  right  of  petition  and  of  freedom  of 
speech  in  the  declaration  of  gravamina,  asserted  by  the  invaluable 
precedents  of  1301  and  1309.  As  the  petitions  of  the  commons 
were  urged  in  connection  with  the  discussion  of  money  grants,  it 
was  very  difficult  to  refuse  them  peremptorily  without  losing  the 
chance  of  a  grant.  They  were,  also,  it  may  be  fairly  allowed,  stated 
almost  invariably  in  reasonable  and  respectful  language.  Thus, 
although  when  it  was  necessary  to  refuse  them,  the  refusal  is 
frequently  stated  very  distinctly,  in  most  cases  it  was  advisable 
either  to  agree  or  to  pretend  to  agree,  or  if  not  to  declare 
that  the  matter  in  question  should  be  duly  considered;  the  form 
le  roi  s'avisera  did  not  certainly  in  its  original  use  involve  a 
downright  rejection. 

§  9.   Royal  Evasion  o)  Petitions 

But  the  king's  consent  to  the  prayer  of  a  petition  did  not  turn 
it  into  a  statute ;  it  might  be  forgotten  in  the  hurry  of  business,  or 


150  English  Historians 

in  the  interval  between  two  Parliaments;  and  as  the  House  of 
Commons  seldom  consisted  of  the  same  members  for  two  years 
together,  it  might  thus  drop  out  of  sight  altogether,  or  it  might 
purposely  be  left  incomplete.  If  it  were  turned  into  a  statute,  the 
statute  might  contain  provisions  which  were  not  contained  in  the 
petition  and  which  robbed  the  concession  of  its  true  value;  or, 
if  it  were  honestly  drawn  up,  it  might  contain  no  provisions  for 
execution,  and  so  remain  a  dead  letter.  And  when  formally  drawn, 
sealed,  and  enrolled,  it  was  liable  to  be  suspended  either  generally 
or  in  particular  cases  by  the  will  of  the  king ;  possibly,  as  was  the 
case  in  1341,  to  be  revoked  altogether.  The  constant  complaints, 
recorded  in  the  petitions  on  the  Rolls  of  Parliament,  show  that 
resort  was  had  to  each  of  these  means  of  evading  the  fulfilment  of 
the  royal  promises  even  when  the  grants  of  money  were  made  con- 
ditional upon  their  performance;  and  the  examination  of  these 
evasions  is  not  the  least  valuable  of  the  many  lessons  which  the 
history  of  the  prerogative  affords. 

The  first  point  to  be  won  was  the  right  to  insist  on  clear  and 
formal  answers  to  the  petitions,  and  this  was  itself  a  common  sub- 
ject of  petition;  in  several  of  the  Parliaments  of  Edward  III, 
for  instance  in  1332,  the  proceedings  of  the  session  were  so  much 
hurried  that  there  was  no  time  to  discuss  the  petitions,  and  the 
king  was  requested  to  summon  another  Parliament.  In  1373  the 
king  urged  that  the  question  of  supplies  should  be  settled  before 
the  petitions  were  entertained;  the  commons  met  the  demand 
with  a  prayer  that  they  should  be  heard  at  once.  Occasionally 
the  delay  was  so  suspicious  that  it  had  to  be  directly  met  with  the 
proposition  such  as  was  made  in  1383,  that  the  Parliament  should 
not  break  up  until  the  business  of  the  petitions  had  been  completed. 
If  the  answer  thus  extorted  were  not  satisfactory,  means  must  be 
taken  to  make  it  so;  in  1341,  when  the  king  had  answered  the 
petitions,  the  lords  and  commons  were  advised  that  "the  said 
answers  were  not  so  full  and  sufficient  as  the  occasion  required," 
and  the  clergy  were  likewise  informed  that  they  were  not  "so  pleas- 
ant as  reason  demanded."  The  several  estates  accordingly  asked 
to  have  the  answers  in  writing;  they  were  then  discussed  and 
modified.  If  the  answers  were  satisfactory,  it  was  necessary  next 
to  make  them  secure;  to  this  end  were  addressed  the  petitions  that 
the  answers  should  be  reduced  into  form  and  sealed  before  the 
Parliament  separated;  thus  in  1344  and  1362  the  commons  prayed 
that  the  petitions  might  be  examined  and  redress  ordered  before 
the  end  of  the  Parliament  pur  salvetee  du  poeple;  in  1352  that 


Growth  of  Parliamentary  Powers  151 

all  the  reasonable  petitions  of  their  estate  might  be  granted,  con- 
firmed, and  sealed  before  the  departure  of  the  Parliament;  and  in 
1379  the  same  request  was  made  with  an  additional  prayer  that  a 
statute  might  be  made  to  the  same  effect.  The  king  granted  the 
first  point,  but  said  nothing  about  the  statute,  and  no  such  statute 
was  enacted.  As  a  rule,  however,  this  was  the  practice :  either  the 
petitions  were  answered  at  once,  or  the  private  and  less  important 
were  left  to  the  council,  or  once  or  twice  perhaps,  as  in  1388,  were 
deferred  to  be  settled  by  a  committee  which  remained  at  work 
after  the  Parliament  broke  up. 

§  10.    Changes  in  Transmuting  Petitions  into  Statutes 

A  more  damaging  charge  than  that  of  delaying  the  answers  to 
petitions  is  involved  in  the  complaint  that  the  purport  of  the 
answers  was  changed  during  the  process  of  transmutation  into 
statute.  To  avoid  this  the  commons  petitioned  from  time  to  time 
that  the  statutes  or  ordinances  of  reform  should  be  read  before  the 
house  previously  to  being  engrossed  or  sealed.  Thus  in  1341  it 
was  made  one  of  the  conditions  of  a  grant,  that  the  petition  showed 
by  the  great  men  and  the  commons  should  be  affirmed  according 
as  they  were  granted  by  the  king,  by  statute,  charter,  or  patent; 
in  1344  the  commons  prayed  that  the  petitions  might  be  reviewed 
and  examined  by  the  magnates  and  other  persons  assigned;  in 
1347  the  commons  prayed  that  all  the  petitions  presented  by 
their  body  for  the  common  profit  and  amendment  of  mischiefs 
might  be  answered  and  indorsed  in  Parliament  before  the  com- 
mons, that  they  might  know  the  indorsements  and  have  remedy 
thereon  according  to  the  ordinance  of  Parliament;  in  1348  they 
asked  that  the  petitions  to  be  introduced  in  the  present  session 
might  be  heard  by  a  committee  of  prelates,  lords,  and  judges,  in 
the  presence  of  four  or  six  members  of  the  commons,  so  that  they 
might  be  reasonably  answered  in  the  present  Parliament,  and, 
when  they  were  answered  in  full,  the  answers  might  remain  in 
force  without  being  changed.  In  1377  it  was  necessary  to  main- 
tain that  the  petitions  themselves  should  be  read  before  the  lords 
and  commons,  that  they  might  be  debated  amicably  and  in  good 
faith  and  reason,  and  so  determined;  and  in  the  same  Parliament 
the  commons  demanded  that,  as  the  petitions  to  which  Edward  III 
in  the  last  Parliament  but  one  had  replied  le  roi  le  veut  ought  to 
be  made  into  statutes,  the  ordinances  framed  on  these  petitions 
should  be  read  and  rehearsed  before  them  with  a  view  to  such  an 


152  English  Historians 

enactment;  in  1381  they  demanded  that  the  ordinance  for  the 
royal  household,  made  in  consequence  of  the  petition,  might  be 
laid  before  them  that  they  might  know  the  persons  and  manner 
of  the  said  ordinance  before  it  was  engrossed  and  confirmed; 
in  1385,  as  in  1341,  it  was  made  one  of  the  conditions  of  a  grant, 
that  the  points  contained  in  certain  special  bills  should  be  indorsed 
in  the  same  manner  as  they  had  been  granted  by  the  king.  Many 
expedients  were  adopted  to  insure  this;  in  1327  it  was  proposed 
that  the  points  conceded  by  the  king  should  be  put  in  writing, 
sealed,  and  delivered  to  the  knights  of  the  shire  to  be  published 
in  their  counties;  in  1339  the  commons  prayed  the  king  to  show 
them  what  security  he  would  give  them  for  the  performance  of  their 
demands;  in  1340  a  joint  committee  of  the  lords  and  commons  was 
named  to  embody  in  a  statute  the  points  of  petition  which  were 
to  be  made  perpetual,  those  which  were  of  temporary  importance 
being  published  as  ordinances  in  letters  patent;  in  1341  the  prayer 
was  made  that  the  petitions  of  the  magnates  and  of  the  commons 
be  affirmed  accordingly  as  they  had  been  granted  by  the  king,  the 
perpetual  points  in  statutes,  the  temporary  ones  in  letters  patent 
or  charters;  and  in  1344  the  conditions  of  the  money  grant  were 
embodied  in  letters  patent  pur  reconforter  le  poeple,  and  so 
enrolled  on  the  statute  roll.  This  form  of  record  recommended 
itself  to  the  clergy  also;  they  demanded  that  their  grant  and  the 
conditions  on  which  it  was  made  should  be  recorded  in  a  charter. 
We  have  not,  it  is  true,  any  clear  instances  in  which  unfair 
manipulation  of  the  petitions  was  detected  and  corrected,  but  the 
prayers  of  the  petitions  here  enumerated  can  scarcely  admit  of 
other  interpretation;  unless  some  such  attempts  had  been  made, 
such  perpetual  misgivings  would  not  have  arisen.  There  was  no 
doubt  a  strong  temptation,  in  case  of  any  promise  wrung  by  com- 
pulsion from  the  king,  to  insert  in  the  enactment  which  embodied 
it  a  saving  clause  which  would  rob  it  of  much  of  its  value.  The 
mischief  wrought  by  these  saving  clauses  was  duly  appreciated. 
By  a  salvo  ordine  meo,  or  "saving  the  rights  of  the  church," 
the  great  prelates  of  the  twelfth  century  had  tried  to  escape  from 
the  obligations  under  which  royal  urgency  had  placed  them,  and 
had  perpetuated  if  they  had  not  originated  the  struggles  between 
the  crown  and  the  clergy.  Henry  II,  himself  an  adept  in  diplo- 
matic craft,  had  been  provoked  beyond  endurance  by  the  use  of 
this  weapon  in  the  hands  of  Becket.  Edward  I  had  in  vain 
attempted  in  1299  to  loosen  the  bonds  in  which  his  own  promise 
had  involved  him,  by  an  insertion  of  a  proviso  of  the  kind ;  and 


Growth  of  Parliamentary  Powers  153 

again  in  1300  the  articles  additional  to  the  charters  had  contained 
an  ample  reservation  of  the  rights  of  his  prerogative.  The  in- 
stances, however,  given  above,  which  are  found  scattered  through 
the  whole  records  of  the  century,  show  that  the  weak  point  of  the 
position  of  the  commons  was  their  attitude  of  petition. 

§  ii.   Substitution  of  Bill  for  Petition 

The  remedy  for  this  was  the  adoption  of  a  new  form  of  initia- 
tion; the  form  of  bill  was  substituted  for  that  of  petition;  the 
statute  was  brought  forward  in  the  shape  which  it  was  in- 
tended ultimately  to  take,  and  every  modification  in  the  original 
draft  passed  under  the  eyes  of  the  promoters.  This  change  took 
place  about  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Henry  VI.  Henry  V  had 
been  obliged  to  reply  to  a  petition,  in  which  the  commons  had 
insisted  that  no  statutes  should  be  enacted  without  their  consent, 
that  from  henceforth  nothing  should  "be  enacted  to  the  petitions 
of  his  commune  that  be  contrairie  of  their  asking,  whereby  they 
should  be  bound  without  their  assent."  This  concession  involves, 
it  is  true,  the  larger  question  of  the  position  of  the  commons  in 
legislation,  but  it  amounts  to  a  confession  of  the  evil  for  the  remedy 
of  which  so  many  prayers  had  been  addressed  in  vain. 

§  12.   Difficulties  in  Securing  Enforcement  of  the  Statutes 

The  frequent  disregard  of  petitions  ostensibly  granted,  but  not 
embodied  in  statutes,  is  proved  by  the  constant  repetition  of  the 
same  requests  in  successive  Parliaments,  such  for  instance  as  the 
complaints  about  purveyance  and  the  unconstitutional  dealings 
with  the  customs,  which  we  have  already  detailed.  The  difficulty 
of  securing  the  execution  of  those  which  had  become  statutes  is 
shown  by  the  constant  recurrence  of  petitions  that  the  laws  in 
general,  and  particular  statutes,  may  be  enforced ;  even  the  funda- 
mental statutes  of  the  constitution,  the  Great  Charter,  and  the 
charter  of  the  forests  are  not  executed  in  a  way  that  satisfies  the 
commons,  and  the  prayer  is  repeated  so  often  as  to  show  that  little 
reliance  was  placed  on  the  most  solemn  promises  for  the  proper 
administration  of  the  most  solemn  laws.  It  became  a  rule  during 
the  reign  of  Edward  III  for  the  first  petition  on  the  roll  to  contain 
a  prayer  for  the  observance  of  the  Great  Charter,  and  this  may 
have  been  to  some  extent  a  mere  formality. 

But  the  repeated  complaints  of  the  inefficiency  of  particular 


154  English   Historians 

statutes  are  not  capable  of  being  so  explained.  Two  examples 
may  suffice:  in  1355  the  commons  pray  especially  that  the  statute 
of  the  staple,  the  statute  of  1340  on  sheriffs,  the  statute  of  purvey- 
ance, the  statute  of  weights  and  measures,  and  the  statute  of 
Westminster  the  First  may  be  kept;  in  each  case  the  king  assents. 
The  annual  appointment  of  sheriffs  which  was  enacted  by  statute 
in  1340  is  a  constantly  recurring  subject  of  petitions  of  this  sort. 
It  would  seem  that  the  king  tacitly  overruled  the  operation  of  the 
act  and  prolonged  the  period  of  office  as  and  when  he  pleased; 
the  answer  to  the  petition  generally  is  affirmative,  but  Edward 
III  in  granting  it  made  a  curious  reservation  which  seems  equiva- 
lent to  a  refusal;  in  case  a  good  sheriff  should  be  found,  his 
commission  might  be  renewed  and  he  himself  sworn  afresh. 
Richard  II  in  1384  deigned  to  argue  the  point  with  the  commons; 
it  was  inexpedient,  they  were  told,  that  the  king  should  be  for- 
bidden to  reappoint  a  man  who  had  for  a  year  discharged  loyally 
his  duty  to  both  king  and  people.  In  1383  he  had  consented  that 
commissions  granting  a  longer  tenure  of  the  sheriffdom  should  be 
repealed,  saving  always  to  the  king  his  prerogative  in  this  case  and 
in  all  others;  but  now  he  declared  simply  that  he  would  do  what 
should  seem  best  for  his  own  profit  and  that  of  the  people.  He 
stated  his  reasons  still  more  fully  in  1397. 

If  it  were  within  the  terms  of  the  king's  prerogative  not  merely 
to  allow  a  statute  to  become  inefficient  for  want  of  administrative 
industry,  but  actually  to  override  an  enactment  like  that  fixing 
the  duration  of  the  sheriff's  term  of  office,  it  was  clearly  not  for- 
bidden him  to  interfere  by  direct  and  active  measures  with  the 
observance  of  laws  which  he  disliked.  It  is  unnecessary  to  remark 
further  on  the  cases  of  financial  illegality  in  which  the  plain  terms 
of  statutes  were  transgressed,  and  which  have  been  already  noticed. 
These  infractions  of  the  constitution  cannot  be  palliated  by  show- 
ing that  an  equal  training  of  prerogative  was  admitted  in  other 
departments,  but  the  examples  that  prove  the  latter  show  that 
finance  was  not  the  only  branch  of  administration  in  which  the 
line  between  legislative  and  executive  machinery  was  very  faintly 
drawn.  The  case  of  a  king  revoking  a  statute  properly  passed, 
sealed,  and  published,  as  Edward  III  did  in  1341,  is  happily 
unique:  that  most  arbitrary  proceeding  must  have  been  at  the 
time  regarded  as  shameful,  and  was  long  remembered  as  a  warning. 
Edward  himself,  by  procuring  the  repeal  of  the  obnoxious  clauses 
in  the  Parliament  of  1343,  acknowledged  the  illegality  of  his  own 
conduct. 


Growth  of  Parliamentary  Powers  155 

The  only  event  which  can  be  compared  with  this  is  the  summary 
annulment  by  John  of  Gaunt  of  the  measures  of  the  Good  Parlia- 
ment, an  act  which  the  commons  in  the  first  Parliament  of  Richard 
II  remarked  on  in  general  but  unmistakable  terms  of  censure; 
but  the  resolutions  of  the  Good  Parliament  had  not  taken  the  form 
of  statute,  and  so  far  as  they  were  judicial  might  be  set  aside  by 
the  exercise  of  the  royal  prerogative  of  mercy.  The  royal  power 
however  of  suspending  the  operation  of  a  statute  was  not  so 
determinately  proscribed.  The  suspension  of  the  constitutional 
clauses  of  the  charter  of  Runneymede,  which  William  Marshall, 
acting  as  regent,  omitted  in  the  re-issue  of  the  charter  of  liberties 
in  1216,  shows  that  under  certain  circumstances  such  a  power 
was  regarded  as  necessary;  and  the  assumption  by  Edward  I, 
in  1297,  of  the  attitude  of  a  dictator,  was  excused,  as  it  is  partly 
justified,  by  the  exigency  of  the  moment.  There  are  not,  however, 
many  instances  in  which  so  dangerous  a  weapon  was  resorted  to. 
The  most  significant  are  those  in  which  the  king  was  acting  diplo- 
matically and  trying  to  satisfy  at  once  the  pope  and  the  Parliament. 
Thus  in  1307  Edward  I,  almost  as  soon  as  he  had  passed  the  statute 
of  Carlisle,  which  ordered  that  no  money  raised  by  the  taxation  of 
ecclesiastical  property  should  be  carried  beyond  the  sea,  was  com- 
pelled by  the  urgent  entreaty  of  the  papal  envoy  to  suspend  the 
operation  of  the  law  in  favor  of  the  pope;  in  letters  patent  he 
announced  to  his  people  that  he  had  allowed  the  papal  agents  to 
execute  their  office,  to  collect  the  first-fruits  of  vacant  benefices, 
and  to  send  them  to  the  pope  by  way  of  exchange  through  the 
merchants,  notwithstanding  the  prohibitions  enacted  in  Parlia- 
ment. 

The  whole  history  of  the  statute  of  provisors  is  one  long  story 
of  similar  tactics,  a  compromise  between  the  statute  law  and  the 
religious  obedience  which  was  thought  due  to  the  apostolic  see; 
by  regarding  the  transgression  of  the  law  simply  as  an  infraction  of 
the  royal  right  of  patronage,  to  be  condoned  by  the  royal  license, 
the  royal  administration  virtually  conceded  all  that  the  popes 
demanded ;  the  persons  promoted  by  the  pope  renounced  all  words 
prejudicial  to  the  royal  authority  which  occurred  in  the  bulls  of 
appointment,  and  when  the  king  wished  to  promote  a  servant  he 
availed  himself  of  the  papal  machinery  to  evade  the  rights  of  the 
cathedral  chapters.  This  compromise  was  viewed  with  great 
dislike  by  the  Parliaments;  in  1391  the  knights  of  the  shire  threw 
out  a  proposal  to  repeal  the  statute  of  provisors,  which  had  lately 
been  made  more  rigorous,  although  the  proposal  was  supported 


156  English  Historians 

by  the  king  and  the  Duke  of  Lancaster;  but  they  allowed  the  king 
until  the  next  Parliament  to  overrule  the  operation  of  the  statute. 

§  13.   Exercise  of  Dispensing  Power 

The  more  common  plan  of  dispensing  by  special  license  with 
the  operation  of  a  statute,  in  the  way  of  pardons  and  grants  of 
immunity,  was  less  dangerous  to  the  constitution  and  less  clearly 
opposed  to  the  theory  of  the  monarchy  as  accepted  in  the  Middle 
Ages.  Yet  against  the  lavish  exercise  of  this  prerogative  the  com- 
mons are  found  remonstrating  from  time  to  time  in  tones  suffi- 
ciently peremptory.  The  power  was  restricted  by  the  statute  of 
Northampton  passed  in  1328;  but  in  1330  and  1347  the  king  was 
told  that  the  facilities  for  obtaining  pardons  were  so  great  that 
murders  and  all  sorts  of  felonies  were  committed  without  restraint; 
the  commons  in  the  latter  year  prayed  that  no  such  pardons  might 
be  issued  without  consent  of  Parliament,  and  the  king,  in  his  answer, 
undertook  that  no  such  charters  should  thenceforth  be  issued  unless 
for  the  honor  and  profit  of  himself  and  of  his  people.  A  similar 
petition  was  presented  in  1351,  and  instances  might  be  multiplied 
which  would  seem  to  show  that  this  evil  was  not  merely  an  abuse 
of  the  royal  attribute  of  mercy  or  a  defeat  of  the  ordinary  processes 
of  justice,  but  a  regularly  systematized  perversion  of  prerogative, 
by  the  manipulation  of  which  the  great  people  of  the  realm,  whether 
as  maintainers  or  otherwise,  attempted  to  secure  for  their  retainers 
and  those  who  could  purchase  their  support,  an  exemption  from 
the  operation  of  the  law. 

Even  thus  viewed,  however,  it  belongs  rather  to  the  subject  of 
judicature  than  to  legislation. 

These  were  the  direct  ways  of  thwarting  the  legal  enactments 
to  which  the  king  had  given  an  unwilling  consent.  Indirectly  the 
same  end  was  obtained  by  means  which,  if  not  less  distinctly 
unconstitutional,  were  less  distinctly  illegal ;  that  is,  by  obtaining 
petitions  for  the  reversal  of  recent  legislation,  or  by  influencing  the 
elections  in  order  to  obtain  a  subservient  majority.  For  both  of 
these  devices  the  short  duration  of  the  Parliaments  afforded  great 
facilities,  and  under  Edward  III  and  Richard  II  both  were 
adopted.  In  1377,  for  instance,  the  awards  of  the  Good  Parliament 
were  annulled  on  the  petition  of  a  packed  House  of  Commons.  In 
1351  the  commons  prayed  that  no  statute  might  be  changed  in 
consequence  of  the  bill  presented  by  any  single  person ;  in  1348 
that  for  no  bill  delivered  in  this  Parliament  in  the  name  of  the 


Growth  of  Parliamentary  Powers  157 

commons  or  of  anyone  else  might  the  answers  already  given  to  their 
petitions  be  altered.  The  king  in  the  former  case  asked  an  ex- 
planation of  the  request,  but  in  the  latter  he  replied  more  at  length. 
"Already  the  king  had  by  the  advice  of  the  magnates  replied  to  the 
petitions  of  the  commons  touching  the  law  of  the  land,  that  the 
laws  had  and  used  in  times  past  and  the  process  thereon  formerly 
used,  could  not  be  changed  without  making  a  new  statute  on  the 
matter,  which  the  king  neither  then  nor  since  had  for  certain  causes 
been  able  to  undertake;  but  as  soon  as  he  could  undertake  it,  he 
would  take  the  great'  men  and  the  wise  men  of  the  council,  and 
would  ordain  upon  these  articles  and  others  touching  the  amend- 
ment of  the  law  by  their  advice  and  council,  in  such  manner  that 
reason  and  equity  should  be  done  to  all  his  lieges  and  subjects, 
and  to  each  one  of  them."  This  answer  is  in  full  accord  with  the 
policy  of  the  king;  it  is  a  plausible  profession  of  good  intentions, 
but  an  evasive  answer  to  the  question  put  to  him. 


PART  III 

MEDLEVAL  INSTITUTIONS 
CHAPTER  I 

THE  GROWTH  OF  AN  ENGLISH  MANOR 

IN  his  Introduction  to  English  Economic  History  and  Theory, 
Professor  Ashley  has  given  a  clear  and  concise  description  of  what 
may  be  regarded  as  a  typical  English  manor  in  the  eleventh  century. 
He  cautions  us,  however,  not  to  forget  the  great  divergences  from 
the  type  to  be  found  in  all  parts  of  the  country,  owing  to  the  im- 
mense variety  of  private  arrangements  possible.  After  a  careful 
study  of  Professor  Ashley's  chapter,  the  student  will  read  with 
peculiar  interest  the  article  by  Professor  Maitland  in  the  English 
Historical  Review  on  "The  Growth  of  an  English  Manor."  In 
this  article  we  not  only  get  a  detailed  description  of  the  arrange- 
ments of  an  actual  manor,  but  we  also  see  the  changes  that  went 
on  from  generation  to  generation  until  serfdom  disappeared  and 
the  manor  entered  upon  the  modern  age. 

§  i .    Thirteenth-Century  Descriptions  of  the  Manor  of  Wilburton  * 

It  is  not  often  that  one  has  the  good  fortune  of  being  able  to 
study  a  series  of  mediaeval  documents  at  one's  own  time  and  in 
one's  own  house;  but  this  was  given  to  me  by  the  late  Mr.  O.  C. 
Pell,  lord  of  the  manor  of  Wilburton,  in  the  county  of  Cambridge. 
He  committed  to  my  care  a  splendid  line  of  court  and  account  rolls 
which,  though  there  were  some  gaps  in  it,  stretched  from  Ed- 

1  The  English  Historical  Review,  Vol.  IX,  1894,  pp.  417  ff.  By  permis- 
sion of  Professor  Maitland  and  Messrs.  Longmans,  Green,  &  Company, 
Publishers. 

158 


The  Growth  of  an  English  Manor          159 

ward  I  to  Henry  VII,  and  now,  the  consent  of  his  successor,  Mr. 
Albert  Pell,  having  been  very  kindly  given,  I  am  able  to  lay  before 
the  readers  of  this  Review  a  fairly  continuous  history  of  a  par- 
ticular English  manor  during  the  later  Middle  Ages;  and  to  me 
it  seems  that  at  the  present  time  we  have  some  need  for  histories 
of  particular  manors,  for  I  am  convinced  that  the  time  has  not  yet 
come  when  generalities  about  the  English  manor  and  its  fortunes 
will  be  safe  or  sound. 

The  manor  of  Wilburton,  on  the  edge  of  the  fen,  formed  part 
of  the  ancient  estates  of  the  Church  of  Ely.  It  is  fully  described 
in  two  "extents,"  the  one  made  in  1221,  the  other  in  1277.  Of 
these  its  late  lord,  who  was  deeply  interested  in  its  history,  gave 
an  account  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  Cambridge  Antiquarian 
Society.  I  shall  here  speak  of  them  very  briefly,  for  they  are  but 
the  prelude  to  those  documents  which  are  the  theme  of  this  essay. 

The  two  extents  begin  by  describing  the  demesne  land  —  that 
is,  the  land  which  is  in  the  lord's  own  hand.  In  the  extent  of 
1277  he  has  216  acres  ("by  the  lesser  hundred  and  the  perch  of 
1 6^  feet")  of  arable  land,  and  besides  this  he  has  meadow  land 
and  a  wide  expanse  of  fen.  In  the  next  place  an  account  is  given 
of  the  holdings  of  the  "freeholders"  and  "hundredors"  (de 
hundredariis  et  liber e  tenentibus}.  Of  these  there  are  nine,  one 
with  1 6  acres  de  wara,  four  with  12  acres  de  wara  apiece, 
two  with  6  acres  apiece,  two  with  2-|  acres  apiece.  This  arrange- 
ment remained  constant  during  the  half  century  which  elapsed 
between  the  two  surveys.  These  "freeholders "  and  "hundredors " 
pay  small  money  rents  —  the  holder  of  12  acres  pays  id.  a  year; 
they  owe  two  days'  ploughing  in  Lent  and  two  in  winter,  for 
which  they  receive  id.  a  day;  they  have  to  attend  the  great 
boon  day  in  autumn.  They  owe  suit  to  the  court  of  Wilburton  and 
must  attend  the  hundred  court,  which  is  in  the  bishop's  hand; 
hence  their  designation  as  hundredarii.  In  the  later  extent  it 
is  expressly  stated  that  they  owe  a  heriot  (best  beast,  or  32^.), 
a  fine  for  marrying  their  daughters  (326?.),  leyrwite  and  tallage; 
the  gersuma,  or  fine  for  marrying  a  daughter,  is  mentioned  in  the 
earlier  extent. 

In  the  court  rolls  the  existence  of  freeholders  can  from  time  to 
time  be  detected.  They  owe  suit  of  court;  they  are  often  amerced 
for  not  doing  it  or  compound  for  it  with  a  small  sum  of  money. 
There  are  entries  also  which  show  that  they  still  owe  ploughing 
service  and  that  some  of  them  are  very  lax  in  performing  it. 
Again,  descents  and  alienations  are  sometimes  presented  and  the 


160  English  Historians 

heriot  is  still  due.  But  on  the  whole  these  freeholders  seem  to 
have  played  only  a  small  part  in  the  manor;  the  names  which 
occur  on  the  court  rolls  are  chiefly  those  of  customary  tenants. 

In  the  extents  the  description  of  the  freehold  tenements  is 
followed  by  the  heading  De  Operariis  et  Plenis  Terris.  The 
full  land  (plena  terra)  consists  of  12  acres  de  wara.  Of  this 
thorny  phrase  de  wara  I  will  here  say  nothing  —  its  interest  lies 
in  a  remote  past  —  save  this,  that  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  full  land 
at  Wilburton  really  consisted  of  24  acres.  Of  these  full 
lands  there  are  15^.  The  holder  of  such  a  tenement  pays  igd.  a 
year  —  izd.  as  wite  penny,  6d.  as  sedge  silver,  id.  as  ward  penny. 
From  Michaelmas  to  Hokeday  he  does  two  works  a  week,  accord- 
ing to  the  earlier  survey,  three  according  to  the  later;  from 
Hokeday  to  Lammas  three  works  a  week;  from  Lammas  to 
Michaelmas  five  works  a  week;  and  besides  all  this  there  is  a 
good  deal  to  be  done  which  is  not  computed  as  part  of  the  reg- 
ular week  work.  On  the  whole  the  services,  which  are  more 
elaborately  described  in  the  later  than  in  the  earlier  of  the  two 
surveys,  and  which  perhaps  have  become  heavier  during  the 
interval,  are  of  the  familiar  type. 

Then  there  are  10^  cottage  tenements,  which  even  in  Henry 
VII's  day  still  preserved  a  relic  of  the  Domesday  terminology  in 
the  name  "cossetles."  The  holder  of  each  such  tenement  paid 
jd.  a  year  —  ^d.  for  wite  pound,  2d.  for  sedge  silver,  id.  for  ward 
penny  —  and  did  two  works  in  every  week.  The  holders  of  the 
full  lands  and  the  cottiers  owe  suit  to  the  lord's  mill,  a  fine  for 
marrying  their  daughters,  levnvite  and  tallage;  they  cannot  sell 
colt  or  ox  without  the  lord's  leave. 

We  already  see  that  a  basis  has  been  fixed  for  the  commutation 
of  labor  into  money.  Every  "work"  in  autumn  is,  as  we  are 
told,  worth  one  penny,  and  out  of  autumn  every  work  is  worth  a 
halfpenny;  we  also  see  that  one  half-cotaria  is  held  by  a  tenant 
who  "at  the  will  of  the  lord  "  pays  2$.  a  year  in  lieu  of  his  labors; 
but  the  profit  of  the  manor  is  reckoned  mainly  in  "works."  In 
the  way  of  money  rents  the  lord  draws  but  315.  a  year  from  the 
manor,  besides  some  small  dues ;  on  the  other  hand  3773$  "works  " 
are  owed  to  him,  by  a  "work"  being  meant  the  work  of  one  man 
for  one  day. 

From  1 22 1  down  to  the  very  end  of  the  Middle  Ages  the  manor 
seems  to  have  kept  with  wonderful  conservatism  what  we  may  call 
its  external  shape  —  that  is  to  say,  at  the  end  of  this  period  the 
distribution  of  the  customary  tenements  into  "full  lands"  and 


The  Growth  of  an  English  Manor          161 

"cossetles,"  or  cottier  tenements,  was  still  preserved,  though  the 
"full  land"  was  often  broken  into  two  "half-lands." 

§  2.    The  Sale  and  Discharge  of  Works 

At  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth  century  we  see  that  some  of 
the  "works"  were  done  in  kind,  while  others  were  "sold  to  the 
homage."  Thus  there  is  an  account  for  seventeen  weeks  in  the 
winter  of  1303-1304  during  which  the  temporalities  of  the  See  of 
Ely  were  in  the  king's  hand;  in  this  the  bailiff  and  reeve,  after 
charging  themselves  with  the  rents  of  assize  (i.e.  the  fixed  money 
rents),  proceed  to  account  for  105.  lod.  for  "260  winter  works 
sold  to  the  homage  at  the  rate  of  a  halfpenny  per  work."  In  a 
later  part  of  the  account  we  see  how  this  number  of  "works" 
is  arrived  at — the  officers  account  for  1385  works  arising  from 
15^  "full  lands"  and  10  cottier  tenements;  they  then  set  against 
this  number  the  260  works  sold  to  the  homage,  355  works  sold 
to  the  executors  of  the  late  bishop,  57  works  excused  to  the  reeve 
and  reaper,  38  works  excused  to  the  smith,  19  works  due  from  a 
half-cotaria  which  has  been  let  at  a  fixed  rent,  14^  works  excused 
on  account  of  the  Christmas  holiday,  363^  works  the  amount  of 
ploughing  done,  258  works  the  amount  of  harrowing  done,  20 
works  in  repairing  the  ditch  around  the  park  at  Downham,  thus 
getting  out  the  total  of  1385  works. 

A  little  later  comes  a  series  of  accounts  for  some  consecutive 
years  in  Edward  IPs  reign.  The  basis  of  these  accounts,  so  far 
as  works  come  in  question,  is  that  2943  winter  and  summer  works, 
valued  at  a  halfpenny  apiece,  are  due,  and  845  autumn  works 
valued  at  a  penny.  These  numbers  seem  subject  to  some  slight 
fluctuations,  due  to  the  occurrence  of  leap  years  and  other  causes. 
Then  the  accountants  have  to  show  how  in  one  way  or  another 
these  works  have  been  discharged,  and  in  the  first  place  they  must 
account  for  "works  sold."  In  the  year  ending  at  Michaelmas, 
13 22,  the  accountants  charged  themselves  with  the  value  of  1213 
winter  and  summer  works  and  6o£  autumn  works  which  have  been 
"sold,"  in  the  next  year  with  the  value  of  1297^  winter  and  sum- 
mer works  and  170^  autumn  works;  in  the  next  year  with  the 
value  of  1496  winter  and  summer  works  and  149  autumn  works; 
in  the  next  year  with  the  value  of  1225^  winter  and  summer  works 
and  218^  autumn  works;  in  the  next  year  with  the  value  of  1023 
winter  and  summer  works  and  247 J  autumn  works ;  in  the  next 
year  with  the  value  of  1381  winter  and  summer  works  and  63 J 


1 62  English  Historians 

autumn  works.  In  these  and  in  the  later  accounts  it  is  not  usual 
to  state  to  whom  or  in  what  manner  these  "works"  were  "sold"; 
but  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  they  were  sold  to  those  who 
were  bound  to  do  them  —  that  is  to  say,  when  the  lord  did  not 
want  the  full  number  of  works  he  took  money  instead  at  the  rate 
of  a  halfpenny  for  a  winter  or  summer  work  and  of  a  penny  for 
an  autumn  work.  The  phrase  "works  sold  to  the  homage," 
which  occurs  in  the  accounts  of  Edward  I's  time,  may  perhaps 
suggest  that  the  whole  body  of  tenants  were  jointly  liable  for  the 
money  which  thus  became  due  in  lieu  of  works. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  number  of  "works  sold  "  does  not  amount 
to  half  the  number  of  works  due.  How  were  the  rest  discharged  ? 
In  the  first  place  some  were  released ;  thus  the  reeve,  the  reaper, 
and  the  smith  stood  excused;  and  then  again  holidays  were 
allowed  on  festivals ;  thus  the  occurrence  of  the  feasts  of  St.  Law- 
rence and  St.  Bartholomew  serves  to  discharge  a  certain  number 
of  the  autumn  works.  But  very  many  of  the  works  were  actually 
done;  thus  in  one  year  203  "diets"  of  ploughing  between  Michael- 
mas and  Hokeday  discharge  406  works;  in  the  previous  year 
377  works  had  been  discharged  in  similar  fashion;  in  the  year 
before  that  406;  in  the  year  before  that  420^.  Ploughing,  mow- 
ing, harrowing  and  the  like  are  always  wanted ;  other  works  are 
accounted  for  now  in  one  fashion,  now  in  another.  In  one  year 
26  works  were  spent  on  the  vineyard  at  Ely,  in  another  3  works 
were  spent  in  catching  rabbits ;  but  on  the  whole  the  opera  are 
laid  out  in  much  the  same  manner  in  each  successive  year. 

§  3.    The  Manorial  Accounts  in  Edward  IPs  Day 

I  have  examined  the  accounts  for  the  last  six  years  of  Edward 
IPs  reign;  their  scheme  is  as  follows:  The  accountant  is  tne 
re£y_e ;  his  year  runs  from  Michaelmas  to  Michaelmas.  He  begins 
by  debiting  himself  with  the  arrears  of  previous  years.  The  next 
item  consists  of  "Rents  of  Assize."  These  are  the  old  money 
dues  payable  by  freeholders  and  customary  tenants ;  they  amount 
to  no  great  sum,  about  2/.,  but  show  a  slight  tendency  to  in- 
crease, owing  to  the  "arrentation  "  of  some  of  the  minor  sen-ices; 
for  instance,  19^.  is  accounted  for  in  respect  of  a  release  of  the 
duty  of  collecting  sticks  in  the  park  at  Somersham.  Next  comes 
"Farm  of  Land,"  a  single  item  of  325.  in  respect  of  24  acres  of 
demesne  land  which  have  been  let  at  a  rent.  By  far  the  most 
important  item  is  "Sale  of  Crops,"  a  very  variable  item,  fluctuat- 


The  Growth  of  an  English   Manor          163 

ing  between  8/.  and  54/.  Then  follows  "Sale  of  Stock."  Then 
comes  "Issues  of  the  Manor"  (Exitus  Manerii).  Under  this 
head  the  reeve  accounts  for  the  number  of  "works"  that  have 
been  "sold,"  also  on  occasion  for  the  price  of  fowls  and  turf. 
The  "Perquisites  of  the  Court"  comprise  not  only  the  amerce- 
ments, but  also  the  fines  payable  on  alienation  of  the  customary 
tenements  and  the  like.  The  last  item  consists  of  "Sales  accounted 
for  on  the  back  of  the  Roll " ;  these  seem  to  consist  chiefly  of 
sales  of  malt.  The  total  income  varies  between  very  wide  limits, 
rising  to  661.,  falling  to  less  than  2oL 

On  the  credit  side  the  first  heading  is  "Allowances"  or  "Ac- 
quittances." A  sum  of  3^.  has  to  be  allowed  because  the  reeve 
is  excused  that  sum  from  his  rent.  Under  "Custus  Carucarum" 
stands  the  cost  of  making  and  repairing  ploughs,  shoeing  horses, 
and  so  forth.  About  55.  per  annum  is  spent  in  paying  2d.  per 
plough  per  day  for  every  one  of  the  sixteen  ploughs  of  the  tenants 
engaged  in  the  "boon  ploughing"  for  winter  seed  and  for  spring 
seed.  The  "Cost  of  Carts"  is  sometimes  separately  accounted 
for;  the  cost  of  "Repairs  of  Buildings"  is  by  no  means  heavy. 
Under  "Minute  Necessaries"  fall  the  price  of  various  articles 
purchased,  also  the  wages  of  the  only  money-wage-receiving  labor- 
ers who  are  employed  on  the  manor  —  namely,  a  swineherd  at 
45.  ^d.  per  annum  and  an  occasionally  employed  shepherd  at  55. 
a  year.  "Threshing  and  Winnowing "  are  paid  for  as  piece  work. 
"Purchase  of  Corn"  and  "Purchase  of  Stock"  are  headings  that 
need  no  comment.  Under  "Mowing  and  Harvesting"  (Falcatio 
et  Autumpnus}  we  find  no  heavy  charge;  all  that  has  to  be  paid 
for  is  the  tenant's  harvest  dinner,  and  the  wages  during  harvest 
of  the  reeve  and  the  "repereve."  Sometimes  under  the  head  of 
"Forinsec"  (or  Foreign)  "Expenses"  occur  a  few  small  sums  not 
expended  directly  on  the  manor. 

The  reeve  then  accounts  for  the  money  that  he  has  paid  into 
the  Exchequer  at  Ely,  and  then  the  account  is  balanced  and  gener- 
ally leaves  him  in  debt.  Apparently  the  annual  profit  of  the 
manor  varies  between  very  wide  limits.  The  reason  of  this  fluctua- 
tion is  to  be  found  chiefly  in  the  sales  of  corn.  The  highest 
prices  of  the  wheat  sold  in  these  six  years  are  as  follows :  — 

s.    d.  s.    d. 

1321-2      ...120  per  quarter  1324-5  ...  7     o  per  quarter. 

1322-3     ...no  per  quarter  1325-6  ...  50  per  quarter. 

1323-4     ...       72  per  quarter  1326-7  ...  34  per  quarter. 


164  English  Historians 

Such  figures  as  these,  though  they  may  be  familiar  enough  to 
economists,  are  worth  notice,  for  they  show  us  that  however  stable 
an  institution  the  manor  may  have  been  from  century  to  century, 
agriculture  involved  a  very  high  degree  of  risk. 

On  the  back  of  the  account  roll  the  reeve  proceeds  to  account 
for  the  produce  of  the  manor  and  the  "works"  of  the  ten- 
ants. First  comes  Compotus  Grangie  ("Barn  Account").  The 
reeve  has  received  so  many  quarters  of  wheat  from  the  barn; 
so  many  have  gone  in  seed,  so  many  in  provender  for  the  manorial 
servants,  so  many  remain  in  the  barn.  Rye,  barley,  pease,  oats, 
and  malt  have  to  be  similarly  accounted  for ;  the  account  is  checked 
by  tallies  between  the  reeve,  the  reaper,  and  the  barnkeeper. 
There  are  four  ploughmen  and  one  shepherd  who  are  famuli 
manerii  and  in  receipt  of  corn,  each  of  them  getting  one  quar- 
ter per  week  during  some  twelve  weeks  of  the  year.  Next 
comes  Compotus  Stauri  ("Account  of  Live  Stock"),  under 
which  heading  the  horses,  oxen,  and  pigs  are  enumerated.  Then 
under  Compotus  Operum  ("Account  of  Works")  the  reeve 
has  to  show,  as  explained  above,  how  some  3700  works  have 
been  discharged,  the  autumn  works,  worth  a  penny  apiece, 
being  distinguished  from  the  winter  and  summer  works,  worth 
a  halfpenny. 

Now,  glancing  at  the  manor  as  a  whole,  we  see  that  to  a  very 
large  extent  it  is  still  dependent  on  the  labors  of  its  villeins.  The 
whole  amount  received  by  way  of  rent  is  but  2/.  ios.,  or  thereabouts, 
while  the  price  of  works  sold  brings  in  some  3/.  or  4/.  Almost  all 
the  regular  agricultural  work,  with  the  exception  of  threshing  and 
winnowing,  is  done  for  the  lord  by  his  tenants.  He  is  as  yet  no 
great  "employer  of  labor"  in  the  modern  sense;  wages  are  a 
comparatively  trifling  item  in  his  accounts.  He  generally  employs 
a  hired  swineherd  and  a  hired  shepherd,  and  during  some  part  of 
the  year  he  has  ploughmen,  who  are  paid  in  grain.  But  the  main 
part  of  his  ploughing,  reaping,  mowing,  harrowing,  is  done  by 
those  who  are  bound  to  do  it  by  status  or  tenure.  .  .  . 

§  4.    The  Manor  at  the  Close  of  the  Fourteenth  Century 

From  the  reign  of  Edward  III  there  are  no  accounts ;  but  turn- 
ing to  those  of  Richard  IPs  time  we  find  that  the  theory  of  the 
account,  so  far  as  "works"  are  concerned,  is  still  the  same.  It  is 
now  reckoned  that  there  are  2970  winter  and  summer  works, 
worth  a  halfpenny  apiece,  and  813  autumn  works  worth  a  penny 


The  Growth  of  an   English   Manor  165 

apiece,  to  be  accounted  for.  Some  of  these  works  are  "sold," 
some  not  sold;  thus  in  the  year  ending  Michaelmas,  1393,  we 
find  183  works  of  the  one  class  and  93  of  the  other  class  ac- 
counted for  as  sold.  The  number  of  works  sold  varies  much  from 
year  to  year. 

Many  hundred  works  are  still  done  in  kind ;  but  the  number 
so  done  has  been  diminished,  because  no  less  than  four  full 
lands  and  nine  cottier  tenements  "are  in  the  lord's  hand"  and 
have  been  let  out  at  money  rents.  This  has  introduced  into 
the  account  a  new  element — namely,  "Rent  of  Bond  Land" 
(Firma  Terre  Nativa)  or  (Firma  Terre  Nativorum),  which 
brings  in  about  gl.  a  year.  A  large  number  of  opera  has,  there- 
fore, to  be  subtracted  on  this  score,  e.g.  528  winter  and  summer 
works  in  respect  of  the  said  4  full  lands  and  836  similar  works 
in  respect  of  the  said  9  cottier  tenancies. 

•  Exactly  when  or  how  the  change  occurred  the  extent  accounts 
do  not  show.  Already  in  the  first  year  of  Richard  II  there  were  3 
full  lands  and  8^  cottier  tenements,  let  at  a  rent  for  short  terms 
of  years  and  doing  no  work.  But  by  connecting  the  accounts 
with  the  court  rolls  we  are  enabled  to  infer  that  these  lands 
were  vacated  by  villeins  who  fled  late  in  the  reign  of  Edward  III ; 
thus  the  first  full  land  on  the  list  is  that  of  John  Thorold,  who 
fled  in  1376  or  thereabouts,  and  of  whose  flight  the  court  rolls 
continue  to  talk  for  the  next  forty  years. 

Turning,  therefore,  to  the  court  rolls,  we  find  many  entries 
which  seem  to  show  that  during  the  last  half  of  the  fourteenth 
century  and  the  first  quarter  of  the  fifteenth  the  lord  had  great 
difficulty  in  keeping  and  finding  customary  tenants  on  the  old 
terms.  .  .  . 

At  the  very  end  of  the  fourteenth  century  many  of  the  old  "works" 
were  exacted.  In  some  years  more  were  "sold,"  in  some  less. 
In  the  year  ending  Michaelmas,  1397,  only  eight  out  of  2970  winter 
and  summer  works  were  sold;  some  800  were  actually  done, 
many  of  the  others  were  discharged  by  the  fact  that  four  of  the 
full  lands  and  no  less  than  ten  of  the  cottage  tenements  had  fallen 
into  the  lord's  hand  and  had  been  let  by  him  either  permanently 
or  temporarily  at  money  rents.  And  on  the  whole  the  economy 
of  the  manor  is  far  from  being  an  economy  of  cash  payments. 
The  lord  is  no  great  payer  of  wages.  For  the  regular  field  work 
he  has  no  need  of  hired  laborers ;  his  only  permanent  wage-receiv- 
ing hind  is  a  shepherd;  but  there  are  ploughmen  who  receive 
allowances  of  grain. 


l66  English   Historians 


§  5.    The  Manor  in  the  Fifteenth  Century 

Passing  on  now  to  Henry  IV's  reign,  we  find  that  the  old  mode 
of  reckoning  is  still  preserved.  There  are  still  2970  winter  and 
summer  works  due,  but  5  full  lands  and  10  cottier  tenements  have 
fallen  into  the  lord's  hand  and  bring  in  nothing  but  money;  more 
than  io/.  has  now  to  be  accounted  for  as  "Rent  of  Bond  Lands," 
and  a  proportionate  number  of  works  has  to  be  subtracted.  Of 
the  other  works  some  are  sold ;  in  one  year  204  of  the  winter  and 
summer  works  are  sold,  while  1 14  have  been  discharged  by  harrow- 
ing. In  1407,  however,  the  basis  of  the  account  was  changed; 
it  became  a  recognized  fact  that  6  full  lands  were  no  longer  in 
opere,  and  the  total  number  of  winter  and  summer  works  to  be 
accounted  for  was  reduced  to  1188  and  that  of  autumn  works 
to  378- 

A  great  change  seems  to  have  taken  place  soon  after  this,  dur- 
ing a  period  for  which  we  have  no  accounts.  In  the  first  year  of 
Henry  VI  (1423)  the  "Rent  of  Bond  Lands"  has  risen  to  22/. 
All  the  "works"  seem  now  to  be  released  (relaxantur  custumariis 
domint)  except  the  boon  ploughing:  76  "diets"  of  ploughing 
due  from  the  customers  whether  free  or  bond.  Very  shortly 
after  this,  in  or  about  1426,  another  great  change  was  made. 
The  demesne  of  the  manor,  containing  246  acres  of  arable  land 
and  42  acres  of  meadow,  was  let  to  farm  at  a  rent  of  8/.,  and  the 
demise  of  the  land  which  had  been  actually  in  the  lord's  hand 
seems  to  have  carried  with  it  the  right  to  the  ploughing  service; 
that  service,  therefore,  no  longer  concerns  the  bishop  while  the 
lease  lasts.  The  demesne  land  is  let  cum  operibus  et  consue- 
tudinibus  omnium  customariorum  operabilium.  This  soon  leads 
to  a  great  simplification  and  abbreviation  of  the  accounts,  an 
abbreviation  to  be  measured  in  feet.  The  receipts  are  now  the 
old  assize  rents,  the  rent  of  the  demesne,  the  rents  of  the  bond 
lands,  the  perquisites  of  the  court ;  the  opera  are  no  longer  brought 
into  the  account,  and  the  purchases  and  sales  of  stock  and  crops 
disappear,  for  these,  of  course,  concern  the  firmarius,  not  the 
lord.  The  firmarius,  it  may  be  noted,  is  just  one  of  the  men  of 
the  vill,  one  of  the  copyholders,  as  we  may  now  call  them;  in 
the  first  instance  he  is  the  same  man  who  is  acting  as  reeve. 

Thenceforward  the  bishop  seems  to  have  been  able  to  keep  the 
demesne  land  in  lease,  now  one,  now  another  of  the  copyholders 
taking  it  for  a  term  of  years :  thus  under  Edward  IV  it  was  let  for 


The  Growth  of  an  English   Manor  167 

1 6  years  at  a  rent  of  y/.  It  is  always  recognized  that  the  subject 
of  this  demise  comprises  "the  customs  and  works  of  the  customary 
tenants  of  the  lord."  Meanwhile  the  "Rent  of  Bond"  or  "Na- 
tives' Land, "which  has  declined  from  22/.  to  about  iy/.,  remains 
constant.  .  .  . 

This  evidence  therefore  seems  to  point  to  a  great  change  under 
Henry  V  (1413-1422).  In  the  last  year  of  Henry  IV  the  rent  of 
the  bond  lands  is  entered  at  i  il.  $s.  6d. ;  it  is  still  reckoned  that 
1056  halfpenny  works  and  336  penny  works  are  due;  many  of 
these  are  actually  done  in  kind,  though  some  are  "sold."  When 
the  account  begins  again  under  Henry  VI  the  rent  of  bond  lands 
is  22^.  2S.  iod.,  almost  exactly  double  the  old  amount,  and  all  the 
works  that  are  accounted  for  are  76  diets  of  ploughing.  This 
change  was  immediately  followed  by  another  —  namely,  the  letting 
of  the  demesne,  the  scitus  manerii,  as  it  is  sometimes  called  — 
together  with  the  benefit  of  whatever  opera  remained  uncommuted. 
Whether  the  commutation  under  Henry  V  was  originally  regarded 
as  more  than  a  temporary  or  revocable  measure  does  not  appear; 
practically  it  seems  to  have  been  the  final  step.  .  .  . 

§  6.   Summary  of  the  Development  of  the  Manor 

The  conclusions  to  which  these  rolls  would  lead  us  may  now 
be  stated  in  a  summary  fashion. 

Before  1350  or  thereabouts.  —  The  lord  gets  very  little  by  way  of 
money  rent.  His  demesne  is  cultivated  for  him  by  the  "works" 
of  his  customary  tenants.  More  works  are  due  than  are  wanted, 
and  each  year  he  sells  a  certain  number  of  works  at  a  customary 
rate  —  that  is  to  say,  he  takes  from  the  person  liable  to  work  a 
penny  or,  as  the  case  may  be,  a  halfpenny  in  respect  of  each  work 
that  he  does  not  want.  The  customary  tenants  are  for  the  most 
part,  if  not  altogether,  unfree  men,  and  are  treated  as  such. 

From  1350  to  1410  or  thereabouts.  —  There  is  as  yet  no  per- 
manent commutation  of  work  for  rent.  The  lord,  however,  finds 
the  greatest  difficulty  in  keeping  old  and  obtaining  new  tenants; 
his  tenants,  more  especially  the  cottagers,  run  away  and  relinquish 
their  tenements.  The  lord  still  hopes  to  obtain  tenants  on  the 
old  terms,  but  in  the  meanwhile  has  to  make  temporary  grants  or 
leases  at  money  rents,  and  from  time  to  time  to  reduce  those  rents. 
From  the  tenants  who  still  hold  on  the  old  terms,  he  still  exacts 
a  considerable  number  of  works,  while  other  works  he  "sells" 


1 68  English  Historians 

to  them  year  by  year.  Many  of  the  tenants  are  still  unfree  and  are 
treated  as  such. 

After  1410  or  thereabouts.  —  It  having  at  last  been  recognized 
that  many  of  the  tenements  are  no  longer  in  opere,  and  that  there 
is  no  prospect  of  a  return  to  the  old  state  of  things,  a  general 
commutation  of  all  works  (except  some  ploughing)  takes  place. 
Perhaps  this  is  not  at  once  conceived  as  a  final  change,  but  prac- 
tically it  is  irrevocable.  The  rents  are  the  best  rents  that  the  lord 
can  get,  and  in  course  of  time  it  is  necessary  to  reduce  them.  The 
demesne  land,  together  with  the  benefit  of  such  works  as  are  un- 
commuted,  is  now  let,  for  short  terms  of  years,  to  a  farmer.  The 
lord  of  the  manor  becomes,  in  effect,  little  more  than  a  receiver 
of  rent.  Very  few  practical  traces  of  personal  servitude  remain, 
but  we  read  of  no  formal  emancipation  of  the  bondmen,  and  the 
lord  is  careful  to  preserve  a  record  of  their  bondage. 

In  the  Sixteenth  Century.  —  Owing  to  the  fall  in  the  value  of 
money,  the  copyholder  gradually  acquires  a  valuable  right  in  his 
holding.  His  rent  —  less  than  a  shilling  an  acre  —  becomes 
light.  I  will  not  generalize,  but  to  me  it  seems  that  in  this  instance 
the  copyholder's  vendible  interest  is  almost  entirely  an  unearned 
increment,  the  product  of  American  mines. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Cheney,  The  Disappearance  of  English  Serfdom,  in  the  English  Histori- 
cal Review,  1900,  pp.  20-37.  Leadam,  The  Security  of  Copyholders  in  the 
Fifteenth  and  Sixteenth  Centuries,  in  the  English  Historical  Review,  1893, 
pp.  684  ff.  Page,  Tlie  End  of  Villeinage  in  England.  Trevelyan,  England 
in  the  Age  of  Wycliffe. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  MEDIAEVAL   GILDS 

A  STUDY  of  the  manor  as  a  part  of  mediaeval  economy  must  be 
supplemented  by  an  examination  of  the  towns  and  their  gilds. 
Though  the  population  of  the  towns  at  the  Norman  Conquest 
constituted  a  small  part  of  the  population  of  the  kingdom,  their 
political  and  financial  influence  was  doubtless  out  of  proportion 
to  their  numerical  strength.  Moreover,  they  steadily  increased  in 
numbers  and  power,  especially  after  the  introduction  of  parlia- 
mentary institutions.  Though  the  origins  of  early  towns  and  their 
internal  government  are  the  subjects  of  considerable  controversy, 
the  student  will  do  well  to  take  as  his  starting-point  Professor 
Ashley's  chapter  on  the  gilds,  which  is  a  very  clear  and  systematic 
treatment  of  the  subject. 

§  i.    The  Origin  of  English  Towns1 

At  the  time  of  the  Norman  Conquest  there  were  some  eighty 
towns  in  England.  Most  of  these  were  what  we  should  now 
consider  but  large  villages ;  they  were  distinguished  from  the  vil- 
lages around  only  by  the  earthen  walls  that  surrounded  them,  or 
the  earthen  mounds  that  kept  watch  over  them.  London,  Win- 
chester, Bristol,  Norwich,  York,  and  Lincoln  were  far  in  advance 
of  the  rest  in  size  and  importance ;  but  even  a  town  of  the  first 
rank  cannot  have  had  more  than  seven  or  eight  thousand  inhab- 
itants. We  shall  perhaps  be  not  far  wrong  if  we  estimate  the 
town  population  at  about  a  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  out  of  a 
total  population  of  about  a  million  and  a  half. 

As  to  how  these  towns  had  come  into  existence,  it  were  scarcely 
profitable  to  construct  any  definite  theory  until  the  condition  of 

1  Ashley,  An  Introduction  to  English  Economic  History  and  Theory,  Pt.  I, 
i.  68  ff.      By  permission  of  Professor  Ashley  and  G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons, 


PP 
Publishers. 


169 


170  English  Historians 

the  body  of  the  population  of  early  England  has  been  more  satis- 
factorily determined  than  it  is  at  present.  But  it  is  readily  seen 
that  population  would  tend  to  congregate  at  places  where  high- 
roads crossed  one  another,  or  where  rivers  could  be  forded ;  such 
places,  indeed,  would  in  many  cases  be  of  strategic  importance,  and 
so  would  come  to  be  fortified.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose 
that  any  monastic  orders,  before  the  Cistercians,  "lived  of  set 
purpose  in  the  wilderness";  monasteries  and  cathedral  churches 
were  placed  where  villages  were  -already  in  existence.  But  be- 
neath the  shelter  of  the  monasteries  the  villages  soon  ;rew  into 
small  towns;  the  labor  services  to  which  their  inhabitants  were 
bound,  or  the  commutation  for  them  which  they  paid,  long  testi- 
fying to  the  originally  servile  character  of  the  holdings.  Many  a 
village  around  the  fortified  house  or  castle  of  some  great  noble 
had  a  similar  history. 

Such  towns  necessarily  became  centres  of  what  little  internal 
trade  there  was.  For  although  agriculture  long  remained  one 
of  the  principal  employments  of  the  burgesses,  yet  it  must  have 
early  been  necessary  for  supplies  of  food  to  be  brought  from  the 
country  around;  this  is  the  most  primitive  and  essential  form  of 
trade.  The  lords,  to  whom  the  towns  were  subject,  would  see 
their  interest  in  the  establishment  of  markets  in  which  protection 
was  guaranteed,  and  paid  for  in  the  shape  of  tolls;  and  so  came 
into  existence  those  weekly  or  half-weekly  market  days  which, 
in  spite  of  improved  means  of  communication,  are  still  so  impor- 
tant in  England. 

Commerce  with  the  Frank  kingdom  had  long  been  carried  on 
from  London  and  the  ports  of  Kent,  especially  Sandwich  and 
Dover.  Traffic  with  the  Danish  settlements  on  the  Irish  coast, 
a  traffic  in  which  slaves  were  the  chief  commodities,  brought  Ches- 
ter and  Bristol  into  prominence  in  the  tenth  and  eleventh  centuries ; 
and  the  connection  with  the  Scandinavian  kingdoms,  caused  by 
Canute's  conquest,  brought  York,  Grimsby,  Lincoln,  Norwich, 
Ipswich,  and  many  other  ports  along  the  eastern  coast,  into  active 
commercial  communication  with  the  Baltic  countries.  Yet  the 
trade  with  foreign  countries  cannot  have  been  large;  the  wares 
which,  in  an  old  English  dialogue,  the  merchant  describes  himself 
as  bringing  with  him,  seem  to  be  all  articles  of  luxury  such  as 
would  be  needed  only  by  the  higher  classes,  —  "purple  cloth,  silk, 
costly  gems  and  gold,  garments,  pigments,  wine,  oil,  ivory  and 
brass,  copper  and  tin,  sulphur,  glass,  and  such  like."  The  men- 
tion of  merchants  in  the  English  laws  is  so  infrequent  that  we  can 


The  Mediaeval   Gilds  171 

hardly  suppose  that  any  considerable  trading  class  had  come  into 
existence. 

In  the  troublous  years  which  followed  the  landing  of  the  Con- 
queror the  more  important  English  towns  suffered  greatly;  in 
some  cases  a  third  or  half  the  houses  were  destroyed,  and  the 
population  reduced  in  like  proportion  —  a  result  to  which  the 
chances  of  war  and  William's  policy  of  castle-building  contributed 
in  equal  measure.  But  even  during  the  twenty  years  before  the 
great  survey  of  1086,  the  towns  on  the  southern  coast  had  begun  to 
profit  by  the  closer  connection  with  the  opposite  shore.  And  as 
soon  as  the  Norman  rule  was  firmly  established,  it  secured  for  the 
country  an  internal  peace  and  order  such  as  it  had  never  before 
enjoyed;  the  temporary  retrogression  was  more  than  made  up 
for,  and  in  town  after  town  arose  the  merchant  gild. 

§  2.   Character  and  Origin  0}  the  Merchant  Gild 

The  merchant  gild,  or  hanse,  for  the  words  are  used  synony- 
mously, was  a  society  formed  primarily  for  the  purpose  of  obtain- 
ing and  maintaining  the  privilege  of  carrying  on  trade  —  a 
privilege  which  implied  the  possession  of  a  monopoly  of  trade  in 
each  town  by  the  gild  brethren  as  against  its  other  inhabitants, 
and  also  liberty  to  trade  in  other  towns.  The  exact  character  of 
the  monopoly  probably  varied  somewhat  from  place  to  place. 
Everywhere,  apparently,  non-members  were  left  free  to  buy  and 
sell  victuals;  but  if  they  went  further  and  engaged  in  regular 
trade,  they  became  subject  to  tolls  from  which  the  gild  brethren 
were  free.  If  the  trader  was  prosperous  enough  to  pay  the  en- 
trance money  and  become  a  member  of  the  gild,  but  obstinately 
refrained  from  doing  so,  he  was  coerced  into  compliance  by  re- 
peated fines.  In  some  places  a  promise  to  inform  the  gild  officers 
of  any  man  trafficking  in  the  town  and  able  to  enter  the  gild  was 
part  of  the  entrance  oath  of  every  brother.  Each  member  paid 
an  entrance  fee,  and  probably  other  dues  to  the  gild  chest,  which 
were  spent  for  the  common  purposes  of  the  gild,  especially  in 
festivities.  And  since  no  society  could  be  conceived  of  in  the 
Middle  Ages  without  some  sort  of  jurisdiction  over  its  members, 
the  gild  merchant,  in  its  meetings  known  as  "morning-speeches," 
drew  up  regulations  for  trade  and  punished  breaches  of  commercial 
morality. 

Now  there  certainly  had  existed  before  the  Conquest  both 
religious  gilds  and  frith  gilds,  i.e.  clubs  or  societies  for  the  per- 


1 72  English   Historians 

formance  of  certain  pious  offices,  and  for  mutual  assistance  in  the 
preservation  of  peace.  It  is  quite  possible,  therefore,  that  similar 
societies  for  the  purpose  of  trade  may  have  been  formed  equally 
early;  but  the  first  positive  mention  of  a  merchant  gild  is  certainly 
not  earlier  than  1093.  With  the  reign  of  Henry  I  begins  the  long 
series  of  charters  granted  to  towns  by  the  king  or  other  lords. 
Under  Henry  II  such  charters  were  obtained,  among  other  places, 
by  Bristol,  Durham,  Lincoln,  Carlisle,  Oxford,  Salisbury,  South- 
ampton; and  in  all  these  charters  the  recognition  of  a  merchant 
gild  occupies  a  prominent  place.  Indeed,  the  lawyer  Glanvill, 
writing  at  this  time,  regards  the  commune,  i.e.  the  body  of  citizens 
with  rights  of  municipal  self-government,  as  identical  with  the 
gild  merchant.  Such  merchant  gilds  may  have  been  in  existence 
for  some  time  before  they  were  recognized  by  charter;  the  value 
of  the  charter  lay  rather  in  the  sanction  which  it  gave  to  the  coer- 
cive action  of  the  society,  and  the  rights  which  it  secured  for  its 
members  in  other  than  their  own  towns.  In  spite  of  the  paucity 
of  evidence,  the  existence  of  a  merchant  gild  can  be  definitely 
proved  in  ninety-two  towns  out  of  the  hundred  and  sixty  represented 
at  one  time  or  other  in  the  Parliaments  of  Edward  I.  No  consid- 
erable name  —  with  two  exceptions ;  namely,  London  and  the 
Cinque  Ports  —  is  wanting  from  the  list.  It  is  impossible  not  to 
conclude  that  every  town,  down  to  those  that  were  not  much 
more  than  villages,  had  its  merchant  gild.  This  fact  of  itself  is 
enough  to  prove  the  great  part  it  must  have  played  In  the  town  life 
of  the  time. 

The  evident  similarity  of  the  regulations  of  those  four  gilds 
whose  ordinances  have  been  preserved,  in  places  so  far  apart  as 
Totnes,  Southampton,  Leicester,  and  Berwick,  can  only  be  ex- 
plained by  supposing  that  merchant  gilds  all  over  England  had 
much  the  same  organization.  Each  was  presided  over  by  an 
alderman  (in  some  cases  two),  with  two  or  four  assistants,  usually 
known  as  wardens  or  dchevins;  and  sometimes  there  were  stew- 
ards also.  There  was  generally  a  small  inner  council  of  twelve 
or  twenty-four.  The  alderman  and  wardens,  besides  summoning 
and  presiding  over  the  meetings  and  festivities,  managed  the 
funds  of  the  society,  as  well  as  its  estates  when,  as  was  frequently 
the  case,  the  gild  had  purchased  or  otherwise  acquired  land. 

§  3.    Membership  in  the  Merchant  Gild 

Who  were  eligible  for  membership  it  is  impossible  with  certainty 
to  determine.  It  is  clear  that  the  association  included  a  very 


The   Mediaeval  Gilds  173 

considerable  number  of  persons,  e.g.  as  many  as  two  hundred  in 
the  small  town  of  Totnes;  that  while  it  embraced  merchants 
travelling  to  distant  markets,  it  did  not,  at  any  rate  at  first,  exclude 
craftsmen  as  such ;  that  the  eldest  sons  or  heirs  of  gildsmen  had 
a  right  to  free  admission,  and  younger  sons  on  paying  a  smaller 
entrance  fee  than  others ;  and  that,  certainly  also  at  first,  members 
could  give  or  sell  their  rights,  and  transmit  them  to  heiresses,  who 
might  exercise  them  themselves  or  give  them  to  their  husbands  or 
sons. 

The  most  usual  term  for  the  rights  of  membership  was  seat, 
sedes;  members  were  said  to  seek,  have,  sell,  or  give  their  seat, 
which  was  often  described  as  below  or  above  that  of  another  — 
a  phrase  possibly  referring  originally  to  a  place  in  the  market. 
The  word  gild  is  also  sometimes  used  for  all  the  rights  of  mem- 
bership, though  more  frequently  for  the  meetings  of  the  society, 
especially  for  the  solemn  gatherings  once  or  twice  a  year. 

We  know  that  merchants  from  other  towns  were  admitted  to 
membership,  and  that  the  same  privileges  were  often  obtained  by 
neighboring  monasteries  and  lords  of  manors.  But  clearly  the 
bulk  of  the  members  belonged  to  the  town  itself,  and  there  are 
strong  reasons  for  supposing  that,  of  the  inhabitants,  only  such 
were  admitted  to  membership  as  held  land  within  the  town  boun- 
daries —  the  burgage  tenants,  burgenses  or  cives,  burgesses  or 
citizens  par  excellence,  who  alone  were  fully  qualified  members  of 
the  town  assembly. 

We  must  not,  however,  regard  the  members  of  the  gild  as  being 
all  of  them  great  merchants.  In  most  towns  agriculture  was  still 
one  of  the  main  occupations  of  the  burgesses ;  but  most  holders 
of  land  would  find  it  desirable  to  sell  at  any  rate  their  surplus 
produce.  The  articles  most  frequently  mentioned  in  the  gild  docu- 
ments —  skins,  wool,  corn,  etc.  —  show  that  the  trade  consisted 
almost  entirely  in  the  sale  and  purchase  of  the  raw  products  of 
agriculture.  It  has  already  been  noticed  that  non-members  were 
often  permitted  to  buy  and  sell  subject  to  the  payment  of  tolls, 
but  in  some  cases  trade  in  certain  articles  was  entirely  forbidden 
to  them,  e.g.  in  skins.  More  important  still  is  it  to  observe  that 
in  some  places  the  manufacture  of  cloth  had  become  so  consid- 
erable that  the  merchant  gild  thought  it  worth  while  to  obtain 
from  the  king  a  monopoly  of  the  retail  sale  of  the  dyed  cloth  used 
by  the  upper  classes,  or  even  of  the  retail  sale  of  all  cloth.  We 
shall  see  later  how  these  privileges  brought  them  into  conflict 
with  the  craft  gilds. 


174  English  Historians 


§  4.  Gild  Regulations 

We  have  noticed  that  the  gild  assemblies,  or  its  officers  on  its 
behalf,  drew  up  regulations  and  exercised  a  jurisdiction  in  matters 
of  trade.  These  regulations  illustrate  clearly  a  characteristic  com- 
mon both  to  the  merchant  and  craft  gilds;  namely,  that  while 
each  individual  member  was  within  certain  limits  allowed  to  pursue 
his  own  interests  as  he  thought  best,  there  was  nevertheless  a 
strong  feeling  that  the  trade  or  industry  was  the  common  interest 
of  the  whole  body ;  that  each  was  bound  to  submit  to  regulations 
for  the  common  good,  and  to  come  to  the  assistance  of  his  fellow- 
members.  Thus  it  was  ordered  in  Leicester  that  the  dealers  in 
cloth,  going  to  the  fair  of  S.  Botolph  in  Boston,  should  place 
themselves  on  the  southern  side  of  the  market,  and  the  wool  dealers 
on  the  northern.  Somewhat  later  it  was  provided  that  the  Leices- 
ter merchants  at  Boston  should  always  display  their  cloth  for  sale 
within  the  "range"  in  which  the  Leicester  men  were  accustomed 
to  stand,  under  penalty  of  having  to  pay  a  tun  of  ale.  A  man 
might,  indeed,  for  the  sake  of  security,  take  his  cloth  home  with 
him  at  night  to  a  lodging  outside  the  "range,"  but  he  was  not  to 
sell  it  outside  the  row.  Only  in  such  a  way  was  it  possible  to 
exercise  any  supervision  over  those  who  claimed  to  come  from 
Leicester;  and  only  in  this  way  could  a  fraudulent  dealer  be 
hindered  from  ruining  the  credit  of  the  town's  wares.  But  in 
return  for  these  restrictions  the  gildsman  gained  the  benefit  of 
protection.  If  a  gildsman  of  Southampton  were  put  into  prison 
in  any  part  of  England,  the  alderman  and  the  steward  with  one 
of  the  e"chevins  were  bound  to  go  at  the  cost  of  the  gild  to  procure 
his  deliverance.  At  Berwick  "two  or  three  of  the  gild  "  were  bound 
to  "labor"  on  behalf  of  any  one  in  danger  of  losing  life  or  limb, 
though  only  for  two  days  at  the  gild's  expense.  Individuals  were 
not  to  monopolize  the  advantages  of  trade.  In  Southampton, 
while  a  bargain  was  being  made,  any  other  member  could  come 
up  and  claim  to  join  it  on  giving  security  that  he  could  pay  for  the 
portion  desired.  In  Berwick,  a  man  who  bought  a  lot  of  herrings 
must  share  them  at  cost  price  with  the  gildsmen  present,  and  any 
one  not  present  could  have  his  share  on  paying  the  price  and 
twelvepence  to  the  buyer  for  profit. 

The  jurisdiction  of  the  gild,  of  course,  had  for  its  chief  purposes 
the  maintenance  of  the  society's  privileges.  There  are  frequent 
ordinances  against  acting  as  agent  for  the  sale  of  goods  belonging 


The  Mediaeval  Gilds  175 

to  non-members,  or  teaching  or  aiding  a  strange  merchant  to  pur- 
chase to  the  injury  of  the  gild.  But  an  equally  important  object 
was  the  maintenance  of  fair  dealing  and  of  a  high  standard  of  quality 
in  the  goods  sold.  The  rolls  contain  numerous  records  of  fines 
for  dishonestly  dyeing  wool,  for  mixing  bad  wool  with  good  for 
short  weight,  for  selling  at  more  than  the  assize  or  fixed  price,  as 
well  as  for  the  offence  of  forestalling,  which  we  shall  see  later  to 
have  been  so  carefully  guarded  against. 

The  brotherhood,  moreover,  was  unlike  a  modern  society  aiming 
at  some  particular  material  advantage  in  that  it  entered  into  a 
great  part  of  everyday  life.  Sick  gildsmen  were  visited,  and  wine 
and  food  sent  to  them  from  the  feasts;  brethren  who  had  fallen 
into  poverty  were  relieved ;  their  daughters  were  dowered  for 
marriage  or  the  convent;  and  when  a  member  died  his  funeral 
was  attended  by  the  brethren  and  the  due  rites  provided  for. 

It  was,  as  we  have  seen,  in  the  second  half  of  the  eleventh  cen- 
tury that  merchant  gilds  began  to  come  into  existence ;  during  the 
twelfth  century  they  arose  in  all  considerable  English  towns.  The 
rise  of  craft  gilds  is,  roughly  speaking,  a  century  later;  isolated 
examples  occur  early  in  the  twelfth  century,  they  become  more 
numerous  as  the  century  advances,  and  in  the  thirteenth  century 
they  appear  in  all  branches  of  manufacture  and  in  every  industrial 
centre. 

§  5.    The  Craft  Gild  and  Its  Relation  to  the  Merchant  Gild 

Craft  gilds  were  associations  of  all  the  artisans  engaged  in  a  par- 
ticular industry  in  a  particular  town,  for  certain  common  purposes : 
what  those  purposes  were  will  be  seen  later.  Their  appearance 
marks  the  second  stage  in  the  history  of  industry,  the  transition  from 
the  family  system  to  the  artisan  (or  gild)  system.  In  the  former 
there  was  no  class  of  artisans  properly  so  called ;  no  class,  that  is 
to  say,  of  men  whose  time  was  entirely  or  chiefly  devoted  to  a 
particular  manufacture ;  and  this  because  all  the  needs  of  a  family 
or  other  domestic  group,  whether  of  monastery  or  manor-house, 
were  satisfied  by  the  labors  of  the  members  of  the  group  itself. 
The  latter,  on  the  contrary,  is  marked  by  the  presence  of  a  body  of 
men  each  of  whom  was  occupied  more  or  less  completely  in  one 
particular  manufacture.  The  very  growth  from  the  one  to  the 
other  system,  therefore,  is  an  example  of  "division  of  labor,"  or, 
to  use  a  better  phrase,  of  "division  of  employments."  If,  like 
Adam  Smith,  we  attempted  to  determine  "the  natural  progress  of 


176  English  Historians 

opulence,"  we  might  formulate  the  law  of  development  thus:  In 
an  agricultural  community  the  first  division  of  employments  that 
will  appear  will  be  between  the  great  bulk  of  the  population  who 
continue  to  be  engaged  in  agriculture  and  that  small  number  of 
persons  who  occupy  themselves  in  transferring  the  surplus  raw 
produce  of  one  place  to  other  places  where  there  is  need  of  it. 
When,  however,  as  in  the  case  of  England,  a  country  is  surpassed 
by  others  in  the  arts,  or  is  unable  to  furnish  itself  with  articles  of 
luxury,  such  as  precious  stones,  dealers  in  such  imported  com- 
modities desired  by  the  wealthier  classes  will  appear  even  before 
there  is  a  class  of  dealers  in  the  raw  produce  of  the  country.  But 
in  any  case  the  growth  of  a  small  merchant  or  trading  class  precedes 
that  of  a  manufacturing  class.  .  .  . 

The  relation  of  the  craft  gilds  to  the  merchant  gilds  is  a  very 
difficult  question.  In  many  of  the  towns  of  Germany  and  the 
Netherlands  a  desperate  struggle  took  place  during  the  thirteenth 
and  fourteenth  centuries  between  a  burgher  oligarchy,  who  monop- 
olized the  municipal  government,  and  were  still  further  strength- 
ened in  many  cases  by  union  in  a  merchant  gild,  and  the  artisans 
organized  in  their  craft  gilds,  the  craftsmen  fighting  first  for  the 
right  of  having  gilds  of  their  own,  and  then  for  a  share  in  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  town.  These  facts  have  been  easily  fitted  into 
a  symmetrical  theory  of  industrial  development;  the  merchant 
gilds,  it  is  said,  were  first  formed  for  protection  against  feudal 
lords,  but  became  exclusive,  and  so  rendered  necessary  the  for- 
mation of  craft  gilds ;  and  in  the  same  way  the  craft  gilds  became 
exclusive  afterwards,  and  the  journeymen  were  compelled  to  form 
societies  of  their  own  for  protection  against  the  masters.  It  was 
not  difficult  to  explain  the  much  scantier  notices  as  to  English 
affairs  by  the  light  of  this  theory,  and  to  make  up  for  the  silence  of 
English  chroniclers  by  foreign  analogies. 

The  very  neatness  of  such  a  theory,  and  the  readiness  with  which 
it  has  been  accepted  by  popular  writers  in  spite  of  the  paucity  of 
English  evidence,  have  perhaps  led  some  historians  to  treat  it  with 
scant  consideration.  It  is  urged  that  there  is  no  evidence  of  any 
such  contest  in  this  country  between  burghers  and  artisans.  It  is 
further  maintained  that  the  craft  gilds  had  but  little  independence, 
and  are  to  be  regarded  as  merely  the  machinery  by  which  mu- 
nicipal authorities  supervised  manufacture.  Yet.  this  view  does  not 
seem  satisfactory  in  view  of  the  information  which  has  been  lately 
brought  to  light  with  regard  to  the  merchant  gild.  The  following 
theory  as  to  the  relations  of  the  various  bodies  cannot  be  regarded 


The   Mediaeval   Gilds  177 

as  more  than  a  theory ;  but  it  does  not  seem  to  be  in  collision  with 
facts,  and  it  is  confirmed  by  much  indirect  evidence. 

Membership  of  the  town  assembly,  the  court  leet,  or  portmanmote 
seems  to  have  been  originally  bound  up  with  the  possession  of 
land  within  the  town  boundaries,  and  it  was  the  right  to  appear  in 
such  an  assembly  that  must  originally  have  made  a  man  a  burgess 
or  citizen.  Of  such  burgesses  the  merchant  gild  of  each  town 
was  constituted.  At  first  the  term  merchant,  or  trader,  would 
cover  all  those  who  had  occasion  to  sell  or  buy  anything  beyond 
provisions  for  daily  use ;  and  the  holder  of  a  plot  of  land,  however 
small,  who  was  also  a  craftsman,  would  not  be  excluded.  But 
this  harmonious  union  must  have  been  disturbed  in  two  ways. 
There  came  into  existence  a  class  of  landless  inhabitants  of  the 
towns,  owing  probably  in  the  main  to  the  natural  increase  of 
the  town  population  itself,  but  also  perhaps  partly  to  some  influx 
of  serfs  from  the  country  districts.  These  landless  inhabitants 
could  not  be  regarded  as  burgesses  at  all,  and  therefore  could  not 
be  admitted  into  the  merchant  gild,  even  if  they  had  desired,  and 
had  been  able  to  pay  the  entrance  money.  Many  of  them  would 
become  servants  to  the  richer  citizens,  but  some  would  turn  to 
handicrafts.  And,  secondly,  although  in  a  small  town,  such  as 
Totnes,  the  traders'  gild  might  long  continue  to  include  craftsmen, 
in  the  larger  towns  there  would  be  a  tendency  for  the  management 
of  the  gild  to  fall  entirely  into  the  hands  of  "merchants"  in  the. 
modern  sense  of  the  word,  until  at  last  they  could  venture  to 
impose  and  enforce  the  rule  that  before  admission  to  the  gild  an 
artisan  must  abjure  his  craft.  But  by  this  time  the  merchant  gild, 
whose  members  must  have  from  the  first  exercised  a  predominant 
influence  in  the  town,  had  become  practically  identical  with  the 
governing  body;  or,  rather,  a  municipal  organization  had  come 
into  existence  which  combined  the  rights  of  jurisdiction  of  the 
court  leet  with  the  rights  of  trade  of  the  merchant  gild.  Thus 
two  distinct  issues  were  raised :  were  the  craftsmen  to  obtain  for 
their  gilds  right  of  supervision  and  jurisdiction  over  their  members, 
apart  from  and  independent  of  the  powers  of  the  municipal  author- 
ities ?  and  were  they  to  continue  to  submit  to  the  trading  monopoly 
of  the  gild  merchant? 

§  6.    The  Early  Craft  Gilds  and  their  Control 

The  first  craft  gilds  that  come  into  notice  are  those  of  the  weavers 
and  fullers  of  woollen  cloth.     It  was  the  weavers'  gild,  all  over 

N 


178  English  Historians 

Western  Europe,  that  began  and  led  the  struggle  against  the  old 
governing  bodies.  The  reason  is  obvious:  the  manufacture  of 
materials  for  clothing  was  the  first  industry  in  which  a  wide  demand 
would  make  it  worth  while  for  men  to  entirely  devote  themselves 
to  it,  and  therefore  it  was  the  first  in  which  a  special  body  of  crafts- 
men appeared.  Gilds  of  bakers,  indeed,  are  to  be  found  almost 
as  early;  but  so  much  less  skill  is  required  in  baking  than  in  weav- 
ing, that  it  long  remained,  as  it  still  does  to  a  great  degree,  a  fam- 
ily employment.  Hence  bakers  could  never  be  so  numerous  as 
weavers ;  and  as  the  former  manufactured  for  immediate  consump- 
tion, they  scarcely  came  into  conflict  with  the  trading  monopoly 
of  the  merchants. 

We  owe  to  the  chance  existence  of  the  Pipe  Roll  for  1130  the 
knowledge  that  in  that  year  there  were  gilds  of  weavers  in  London, 
Lincoln,  and  Oxford,  making  annual  payment  to  the  king  in 
return  for  his  authorization  of  their  existence ;  the  weavers  of  Ox- 
ford, referring  in  the  reign  of  Edward  I  to  the  time  when  the  pay- 
ment was  fixed,  declared  that  their  gHd  then  contained  sixty  mem- 
bers. In  the  same  reign  there  was  also  a  gild  of  corvesars,  or 
leather-dressers,  in  Oxford.  During  the  early  years  of  Henry  II 
gilds  of  weavers  are  also  found  at  York,  Winchester,  Huntingdon, 
and  Nottingham,  and  a  gild  of  fullers  at  Winchester,  each  making 
annual  payments  to  the  Exchequer.  The  annual  payment  was 
not  merely  a  tax;  it  was  the  condition  upon  which  they  received 
the  sanction  of  the  government.  Gilds  that  the  king  had  not 
authorized  were  amerced  as  "adulterine,"  as  was  the  case  in  1180 
in  London  with  the  gilds  of  goldsmiths,  butchers,  pepperers,  and 
cloth-finishers.  But  there  seems  to  have  been  no  attempt  to 
forcibly  dissolve  the  adulterine  societies;  they  were  not  large 
enough  to  arouse  the  jealousy  of  the  London  burgesses,  and  every 
one  of  them  survived  to  take  its  place  among  the  later  companies. 

The  only  definite  provision  besides  a  general  confirmation  of 
"liberties  and  customs"  in  the  earliest  charters — such  as  those 
granted  to  the  weavers  of  London  and  York  by  Henry  II  —  was 
that  no  one  within  the  town  (sometimes  the  district)  should  fol- 
low the  craft  unless  he  belonged  to  the  gild.  The  right  to  force 
all  other  craftsmen  to  join  the  organization  —  Zun/t-zu'ang,  as 
German  writers  call  it  —  carried  with  it  the  right  to  impose  con- 
ditions, to  exercise  some  sort  of  supervision  over  those  who  joined. 
It  was  natural  that  the  earliest  gilds,  growing  up  with  a  certain 
antagonism  to  the  burgesses,  should  seek  to  make  their  jurisdiction 
as  wide  as  possible.  But  such  an  independent  authority  would 


The  Mediaeval  Gilds  179 

intensify  the  jealousy  of  the  governing  bodies  in  the  towns.  The 
length  to  which  the  antagonism  between  the  burghers  and  arti- 
sans might  go  is  clearly  illustrated  in  London.  We  do  not  know 
whether  there  had  ever  been  a  gild  merchant  in  London;  how- 
ever, in  1191,  by  the  recognition  of  its  "commune"  the  citizens 
obtained  complete  municipal  self-government,  and  consequently 
the  recognition  of  the  same  rights  over  trade  and  industry  as  a  gild 
merchant  would  have  exercised.  Almost  immediately  they  offered 
to  make  an  annual  payment  to  the  Exchequer  if  the  weavers'  gild 
were  abolished.  John  accepted  the  offer,  and  in  1200  the  gild 
was  abolished  by  royal  charter.  For  some  reason  or  other  it  was 
again  restored  in  two  or  three  years;  but  long  afterwards  the 
weavers  did  not  feel  themselves  out  of  danger. 

§  7.    Struggle  of  the  Craftsmen  for  Privileges 

In  other  towns  it  is  the  economic  struggle  that  is  most  clearly 
discernible.  We  have  seen  that  the  charters  to  towns  granting 
permission  to  have  a  merchant  gild  usually  contained  a  clause  to 
the  effect  that  none  but  the  members  of  that  society  were  to  engage 
in  trade,  and  that  it  is  expressly  stated  in  one  case  that  they  are  to 
have  the  monopoly  even  of  the  retail  sale  of  cloth.  There  is  reason 
to  believe  that  this  was  a  monopoly  very  generally  insisted  upon. 
The  London  Book  of  Customs  contains  certain  entries  entitled 
the  "Laws  "of  the  weavers  and  fullers  of  Winchester,  Oxford, 
Beverley,  and  Marlborough  —  reports  or  copies  which  the  London 
magistrates  must  have  obtained  sometime  in  the  thirteenth  century 
to  strengthen  their  cause.  These  "laws"  draw  a  sharp  distinction 
between  the  craftsman  and  the  freeman,  franke  homme,  of  the 
town.  No  freeman  could  be  accused  by  a  weaver  or  a  fuller,  nor 
could  an  artisan  even  give  evidence  against  one.  If  a  craftsman 
became  so  rich  that  he  wished  to  become  a  freeman,  he  must  first 
forswear  his  craft  and  get  rid  of  all  his  tools  from  his  house.  No 
weaver  or  fuller  might  go  outside  the  town  to  sell  his  own  cloth 
and  so  interfere  with  the  monopoly  of  the  merchants ;  nor  was  he 
allowed  to  sell  his  cloth  to  any  save  a  merchant  of  the  town.  In- 
deed, he  must  get  the  consent  of  the  "good  men  "  of  the  town  before 
he  could  even  carry  on  his  craft ;  and  he  was  not  to  work  for  any 
but  the  good  men  of  the  town.  This  last  rule  reappears  in  an  order 
of  the  gild  merchant  of  Leicester  as  late  as  1265,  prohibiting  the 
craftsmen  of  the  town  from  weaving  for  the  men  of  other  places  so 
iong  as  they  had  sufficient  work  to  do  for  the  burgesses  of  Leicester. 


180  English   Historians 

The  materials  are  not  yet  accessible  which  would  allow  us  tc 
trace  the  way  in  which  the  old  organization  of  the  burgesses  lost 
its  exclusive  rights ;  or,  what  is  perhaps  only  the  other  side  of  the 
same  change,  the  way  in  which  the  craftsmen  gained  the  rights  of 
burgesses.  The  trading  monopoly  was  lost,  probably,  before  the 
end  of  the  thirteenth  century.  It  is  at  any  rate  evident  that  the 
statute  of  1335  allowing  foreign  merchants  to  trade  freely  in  Eng- 
land is  framed  in  such  terms  ;u-  to  clearly  include  English  craftsmen 
in  the  permission  it  gives,  and  that  it  must  have  had  the  effect  of 
weakening  any  monopoly  which  the  governing  class  in  any  of  the 
towns  might  still  claim.  .  .  .  With  the  loss  of  their  trading  monop- 
oly disappeared  the  raison  d'etre  of  the  gilds  merchant,  and  with 
it  of  the  gilds  themselves  as  separate  organizations.  In  many 
towns  the  name  long  survived,  but  only  as  a  term  to  describe  cer- 
tain functions  of  the  municipal  authorities,  especially  the  admission 
of  apprentices  to  the  freedom  of  the  city.  In  others  the  gild  re- 
organized itself  in  the  shape  of  a  social  and  religious  society ;  while 
in  one  or  two  it  is  possible  that  the  later  company  of  merchant 
adventurers  grew  out  of  the  gild  merchant.  .  .  . 

§  8.    The  Growth  o)  the  Craft  Gilds 

At  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Edward  III  there  were  in  London 
forty-eight  companies  of  crafts,  each  with  a  separate  organization 
and  officers  of  its  own,  a  number  which  had  increased  to  at  least 
sixty  before  the  close  of  the  century.  Other  important  towns 
must  have  seen  a  like  increase  in  the  number  of  artisans  and  a  like 
formation  of  companies,  though  subdivision  did  not  go  so  far.  In 
towns  of  the  second  rank,  such  as  Exeter,  the  development  is 
later  and  occupies  the  following  century;  while  in  the  smaller 
towns  companies  were  only  formed  when  there  was  a  considerable 
body  of  men  employed  in  the  same  craft,  so  that  many  artisans 
remained  unbound  by  any  such  organization  and  subject  only  to 
the  regulations  imposed  by  statute,  or  by  the  mayor  or  bailiff. 

We  are  able  roughly  to  determine  the  period  at  which  the  forma- 
tion of  companies  instead  of  being  opposed  began  to  be  forwarded 
by  the  municipal  authorities.  Until  the  reign  of  Edward  I,  seem- 
ingly, craft  gilds  had  arisen  spontaneously  for  the  mutual  help 
and  advantage  of  the  craftsmen :  they  had  been  obliged  to  make 
annual  payments  to  the  king  or  other  lords  to  secure  recognition, 
and  they  had  found  it  difficult  to  maintain  their  rights  against  the 
municipal  authorities.  The  reign  of  Edward  I  appears  to  mark 


The   Mediaeval  Gilds  181 

the  turning-point  in  their  history.  He  saw  that  they  might  be  a 
useful  counterpoise  to  the  power  of  the  governing  bodies  in  the 
towns  and  therefore  exerted  his  influence  on  their  side.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  establishment  of  a  strong  central  authority  made 
it  less  necessary  and  less  possible  for  the  newly  rising  gilds  to 
obtain  such  extensive  rights  of  jurisdiction  as  the  Zunjte  in  Ger- 
many or  the  weavers'  gild  in  London  in  the  previous  century. 
Accordingly,  we  see  a  new  policy  in  the  craft  ordinances,  which 
from  the  reign  of  Edward  II  have  been  preserved  in  such  numbers. 
The  gild  system  no  longer  was  merely  tolerated ;  it  was  fostered 
and  extended,  though  doubtless  primarily  for  police  purposes,  — • 
to  insure  due  supervision  of  the  craft  and  the  punishment  of  of- 
fenders against  regulations,  through  persons  chosen  by  the  craft 
but  responsible  to  the  municipal  authorities.  Up  to  this  time  the 
gilds  had  been  few  in  number,  because  there  had  been  few  artisans, 
and  only  such  as  were  engaged  in  meeting  most  elementary  wants, 
food  and  clothing,  such  namely  as  bakers,  butchers,  leather- 
dressers  —  above  all  those  engaged  in  the  manufacture  of  cloth, 
weavers,  fullers,  and  dyers. 

But  now  a  rapid  increase  in  the  number  of  artisans  takes  place ; 
new  wants  begin  to  be  felt,  and  each  new  want  is  supplied  by  a 
separate  body  of  craftsmen.  Consequently  we  find  the  municipal 
authorities  confirming  or  creating  companies,  not  only  of  such 
wholesale  dealers  as  grocers  and  drapers,  but  also  of  such  artisans 
as  spurriers,  helmet  makers,  brace  makers,  farriers,  wax-chandlers, 
scriveners,  and  piemakers.  It  is  often  not  easy  to  determine 
whether  the  ordinances  which  first  mention  these  companies 
actually  created  them.  In  many  cases  probably  they  had  come 
into  existence  spontaneously  somewhat  before  the  date  of  the 
ordinances  "accepted  by  the  mayor  and  aldermen  at  the  suit  and 
request  of  the  folk  of  the  trade."  But  in  many  cases  also  the 
organization  was  imposed  from  without  by  municipal  rulers.  .  .  . 

§  9.    Internal  Organization  of  the  Craft  Gild 

The  internal  organization  of  the  craft  gilds  can  be  briefly  de- 
scribed. The  most  important  part  of  it  was  the  authority  of  the 
wardens,  overseers,  bailiffs,  or  masters,  whose  chief  duty  was  to 
supervise  the  industry  and  cause  offenders  to  be  punished.  They 
were  elected  annually  at  full  assemblies  of  the  men  of  the  craft, 
absence  from  which  was  punished  by  fine ;  and  it  was  at  such  or 
similar  gatherings  that  from  time  to  time  new  regulations  were 


1 82  English  Historians 

drawn  up  to  be  submitted  to  the  approval  of  the  mayor  and  alder- 
men. No  one  could  work  at  the  craft  who  had  not  been  approved 
and  admitted  to  the  gild  by  its  officials;  and  it  would  seem  that 
in  London,  from  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century,  admission 
to  the  freedom  of  the  city  and  to  a  craft  took  place  at  one  and  the 
same  time. 

In  the  early  part  of  the  fourteenth  century,  apprenticeship  was 
only  gradually  becoming  an  absolutely  necessary  preliminary  to 
setting  up  as  a  master;  to  the  same  period  is  due  the  fixing  of  the 
term  of  apprenticeship  at  seven  years.  A  separate  class  of  jour- 
ney-men was  also  only  just  coming  into  existence.  It  was  still, 
apparently,  the  usual  practice  for  a  man,  on  coming  out  of  his  ap- 
prenticeship, to  set  up  for  himself.  Such  "serving-men"  as  there 
were,  made  contracts  with  master-craftsmen  to  work  for  them  for  a 
certain  term,  sometimes  for  a  period  of  several  years.  But  from 
the  frequency  with  which  the  rule  is  repeated,  that  "no  one  shall 
receive  the  apprentice,  serving-man,  or  journeyman  of  another  in 
the  same  trade  during  the  term  agreed  upon  between  his  master 
and  him,"  and  the  frequency  also  with  which  the  mayor  of  one 
town  has  to  write  to  the  mayor  of  another  to  ask  that  runaways 
should  be  sent  back,  it  appears  that  apprentices  often  became 
discontented,  and  absconded.  The  gild  ordinances  imply  that,  as 
a  rule,  only  master-craftsmen  took  part  in  the  government  of  the 
fraternity,  but  there  is  at  least  one  case  where  ordinances  are 
described  as  agreed  to  "as  well  by  serving-men  as  masters."  It 
does  not  appear  that  as  yet  the  number  either  of  journeymen  or  of 
apprentices  that  one  master  could  take  was  limited  by  legislation 
or  ordinance;  but  we  shall  see  later  that  the  limitation  of  number 
in  the  sixteenth  century  was  in  order  to  maintain  an  existing  state 
of  things,  so  that  it  is  probable  that  at  this  time  a  master  artisan 
would  not  usually  have  more  than  one  or  two  journeymen  and 
one  or  two  apprentices. 

The  regulations  drawn  up  by  the  crafts  aimed  at  the  prevention 
of  fraud,  and  the  observance  of  certain  standards  of  size  and 
quality  in  the  wares  produced.  Articles  made  in  violation  of 
these  rules  were  called  "false,"  just  as  clipped  or  counterfeit 
coin  was  "false  money."  For  such  "false  work "  the  makers  were 
punished  by  fine  (one-half  going  to  the  craft,  the  other  half  to  the 
town  funds),  and,  upon  the  third  or  fourth  offence,  by  expulsion 
from  the  trade.  Penalties  were  provided,  as  far  as  possible,  for 
every  sort  of  deceitful  device :  such  as  putting  better  wares  on  the 
top  of  a  bale  than  below,  moistening  groceries  so  as  to  make  them 


The  Medieval  Gilds  183 

heavier,  selling  second-hand  furs  for  new,  soldering  together  broken 
swords,  selling  sheep  leather  for  doe  leather,  and  many  other  like 
tricks.  It  was  for  the  same  reason  that  night  work  was  forbidden ; 
not,  as  Brentano  says,  with  the  philanthropic  object  of  providing 
work  for  all,  but  because  work  could  not  be  done  so  neatly  at 
night,  and  because  craftsmen,  knowing  they  were  not  likely  to  be 
visited  at  that  time  by  the  wardens,  took  the  opportunity  to  make 
wares  "falsely,"  or  because  working  at  night  disturbed  the  neigh- 
bors. It  seems,  however,  to  have  been  a  general  rule,  that  men 
should  not  work  after  six  o'clock  on  Saturday  evening,  or  on  eves 
of  double  feasts.  There  is,  indeed,  one  regulation  which  does 
seem  designed  to  insure  men's  having  work,  and  that  is,  that 
"no  one  shall  set  any  woman  to  work,  other  than  his  wedded  wife 
or  his  daughter." 

It  is  certain,  from  the  analogy  of  the  gilds  merchant,  as  well 
as  from  what  we  know  of  the  later  usages  of  the  companies  and  of 
the  practices  of  similar  bodies  abroad,  that  in  each  of  the  craft 
gilds,  besides  regulations  as  to  manufacture,  there  were  rules  pro- 
viding for  mutual  assistance  in  difficulties,  for  meetings,  festivities, 
and  common  worship.  But  the  documents  which  would  throw 
light  on  the  subject  have  not  yet  been  published.  The  craft 
statutes  contained  in  the  archives  of  the  corporation  of  London 
deal  almost  exclusively  with  the  regulation  of  processes;  and 
this  is  easy  to  explain,  for  only  the  action  of  the  gilds  in  the  super- 
vision of  industry  would  fall  beneath  the  view  of  the  city  authori- 
ties; with  their  internal  life  as  friendly  societies  the  corporation 
had  nothing  to  do.  Fortunately  one  set  of  ordinances  therein  con- 
tained, those  of  the  white-tawyers  or  leather-dressers,  in  1346,  are 
more  detailed,  and  from  these  we  may  conjecture  similar  customs 
in  other  crafts.  They  have  a  common-box  for  subscriptions;  out 
of  this  sevenpence  a  week  is  paid  to  any  man  of  the  trade  who  has 
fallen  into  poverty  from  old  age  or  inability  to  work,  and  sevenpence 
a  week  likewise  to  a  poor  man's  widow,  so  long  as  she  remains 
unmarried.  "If  any  one  of  the  said  craft  shall  depart  this  life, 
and  have  not  wherewithal  to  be  buried,  he  shall  be  buried  at  the 
expense  of  the  common-box;  and  when  any  one  of  the  said  trade 
shall  die,  all  those  of  the  said  trade  shall  go  to  the  vigil  and  make 
offerings  on  the  morrow."  Some  of  the  companies,  as  we  learn 
later,  had  chantries  and  side  chapels  in  parish  churches,  and 
solemn  services  at  intervals.  The  white-tawyers  are  only  able  to 
afford  "a  wax  candle  to  burn  before  Our  Lady  in  the  Church  of 
All  Hallows  near  London  Wall."  And  there  is  one  clause  which 


184  English  Historians 

clearly  displays  the  effort  after  fraternal  union :  it  is  one  ordaining 
that  "those  of  the  trade"  shall  aid  a  member  who  cannot  finish 
work  he  has  undertaken,  "so  that  the  said  work  be  not  lost." 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Gross,  The  Gild  Merchant.  Hibbert,  Influence  and  Development  oj 
English  Gilds  (Cambridge  Historical  Essays).  Seligman,  Two  Chapters  on 
the  Mediaeval  Gilds  oj  England.  Cunningham,  Growth  oj  English  Industry 
and  Commerce  1906  edit  ion,  Vol.  I,  consult  Table  of  Contents.  Smith,  T.  J., 
English  Gilds  (Early  English  Text  Society),  valuable  for  original  gild  or- 
dinances. Kramer,  The  English  Craft  Gilds  and  the  Government.  Transla- 
tions and  Reprints,  Vol.  II,  No.  2,  for  an  excellent  collection  of  illustrative 
materials 


CHAPTER    III 

TOWN   LIFE   IN    THE   MIDDLE   AGES 

IN  the  examination  of  the  manor  and  the  gild,  the  student  gets 
a  clear  view  of  the  life  of  the  people  of  the  Middle  Ages  so  far  as 
their  economic  activities  were  concerned,  and  theSe  occupy  a  great 
part  of  the  time  and  thought  of  the  people  in  all  ages.  The  medi- 
aeval town,  however,  was  far  more  than  the  gild,  and  it  enjoyed  a 
political  independence  and  self-sufficiency  which  were  afterwards 
overshadowed  by  the  growing  authority  and  activity  of  the  national 
government.  In  view  of  the  recent  developments  in  municipal 
affairs  it  is  interesting  to  read  the  description  of  mediaeval  town 
life  which  is  to  be  found  in  Mrs.  J.  R.  Green's  volumes  on  that 
subject. 

§  i .    Provisions  for  Municipal  Defence  * 

The  inhabitants  of  a  mediaeval  borough  were  subject  to  a 
discipline  as  severe  as  that  of  a  military  state  of  modern  times. 
Threatened  by  enemies  on  every  side,  constantly  surrounded  by 
perils,  they  had  themselves  to  bear  the  whole  charges  of  fortification 
and  defence.  If  a  French  fleet  appeared  on  the  coast,  if  Welsh  or 
Scotch  armies  made  a  raid  across  the  frontier,  if  civil  war  broke  out 
and  opposing  forces  marched  across  the  country,  every  town  had 
to  look  to  its  own  safety.  The  inhabitants  served  under  a  system 
of  universal  conscription.  At  the  muster-at-arms  held  twice  a  year 
poor  and  rich  appeared  in  military  array  with  such  weapons  as  they 
could  bring  forth  for  the  king's  service :  the  poor  marching  with 
knife  or  dagger  or  hatchet;  the  prosperous  burghers,  bound  ac- 
cording to  mediaeval  ideas  to  live  "after  their  degree,"  displaying 
mail  or  wadded  coats,  bucklers,  bows  and  arrows,  swords,  or  even 
a  gun. 

At  any  moment  this  armed  population  might  be  called  out  to 

1  Mrs.  J.  R.  Green,  Town  Life  in  the  Fifteenth  Century,  Vol.  I,  pp.  127  ff. 
By  permission  of  Mrs.  J.  R.  Green  and  The  Macmillan  Company,  Pub- 
lishers. 

185 


1 86  English   Historians 

active  service.  "Concerning  our  bell,"  say  the  citizens  of  Here- 
ford, "we  use  to  have  it  in  a  public  place  where  our  chief  bailiff 
may  come,  as  well  by  day  as  by  night,  to  give  warning  to  all  men 
living  within  the  said  city  and  suburbs.  And  we  do  not  say  that 
it  ought  to  ring  unless  it  be  for  some  terrible  fire  burning  any  row 
of  houses  within  the  said  city,  or  for  any  common  contention  where- 
by the  city  might  be  terribly  moved,  or  for  any  enemies  drawing 
near  unto  the  city,  or  if  the  city  shall  be  besieged,  or  any  sedition 
shall  be  between  any,  and  notice  thereof  given  by  any  unto  our 
chief  bailiff.  And  in  these  cases  aforesaid,  and  in  all  like  cases,  all 
manner  of  men  abiding  within  the  city  and  suburbs  and  liberties 
of  the  city,  of  what  degree  soever  they  be  of,  ought  to  come  at  any 
such  ringing,  or  motion  of  ringing,  with  such  weapons  as  fit  their 
degree." 

At  the  first  warning  of  an  enemy's  approach  the  mayor  or  bailiff 
became  supreme  military  commander.  It  was  his  office  to  see 
that  the  panic-stricken  people  of  the  suburbs  were  gathered  within 
the  walls  and  given  house  and  food;  that  all  meat  and  drink  and 
chattels  were  made  over  for  the  public  service,  and  all  armor 
likewise  carried  to  the  Town  Hall ;  that  every  inhabitant  or  refugee 
paid  the  taxes  required  for  the  cost  of  his  protection ;  that  all  strong 
and  able  men  "which  doth  dwell  in  the  city  or  would  be  assisted 
by  the  city  in  anything"  watched  by  day  and  night,  and  that 
women  and  clerics  who  could  not  watch  themselves  found  at  their 
own  charge  substitutes  "of  the  ablest  of  the  city." 

If  frontier  towns  had  periods  of  comparative  quiet,  the  seaports, 
threatened  by  sea  as  by  land,  lived  in  perpetual  alarm,  at  least  so 
long  as  the  Hundred  Years'  War  protracted  its  terrors.  When 
the  inhabitants  had  built  ships  to  guard  the  harbor,  and  provided 
money  for  their  victualling  and  the  salaries  of  the  crew,  they  were 
called  out  to  repair  towers  and  carry  cartloads  of  rocks  or  stones  to 
be  laid  on  the  walls  "for  defending  the  town  in  resisting  the  king's 
enemies."  Guns  had  to  be  carried  to  the  Church  or  the  Common 
House  on  sleds  or  laid  in  pits  at  the  town  gates,  and  gunstones, 
saltpetre,  and  pellet  powder  bought.  For  weeks  together  watch- 
men were  posted  in  the  church  towers  with  horns  to  give  warning 
if  a  foe  appeared ;  and  piles  of  straw,  reeds,  and  wood  were  heaped 
up  on  the  seacoast  to  kindle  beacons  and  watch-fires.  Even  if  the 
townsfolk  gathered  for  a  day's  amusement  to  hear  a  play  in  the 
Courthouse,  a  watch  was  set  lest  the  enemy  should  set  fire  tov  their 
streets  —  a  calamity  but  too  well  known  to  the  burghers  of  Rye 
and  Southampton. 


Town  Life  in  the  Middle  Ages  187 

Inland  towns  were  in  little  better  case.  Civil  war,  local  rebel- 
lion, attacks  from  some  neighboring  lord,  outbreaks  among  the 
followers  of  a  great  noble  lodged  within  their  walls  at  the  head  of  an 
army  of  retainers,  all  the  recurring  incidents  of  siege  and  pitched 
battle  rudely  reminded  inoffensive  shopkeepers  and  artisans  of 
their  military  calling.  Owing  to  causes  but  little  studied,  local 
conflicts  were  frequent,  and  they  were  fought  out  with  violence  and 
determination.  At  the  close  of  the  fourteenth  century  a  certain 
knight,  Baldwin  of  Radington,  with  the  help  of  John  of  Stanley, 
raised  eight  hundred  fighting  men  "to  destroy  and  hurt  the  com- 
mons of  Chester " ;  and  these  stalwart  warriors  broke  into  the 
abbey,  seized  the  wine  and  dashed  the  furniture  in  pieces,  and 
when  the  mayor  and  sheriff  came  to  the  rescue  nearly  killed  the 
sheriff.  When,  in  1441,  the  Archbishop  of  York  determined  to 
fight  for  his  privileges  in  Ripon  Fair,  he  engaged  two  hundred 
men-at-arms  from  Scotland  and  the  Marches  at  sixpence,  or  a 
shilling  a  day,  while  a  Yorkshire  gentleman,  Sir  John  Plumpton, 
gathered  seven  hundred  men,  and  at  the  battle  that  ensued  more 
than  a  thousand  arrows  were  discharged  by  them. 

Within  the  town  territory  the  burghers  had  to  serve  at  their  own 
cost  and  charges ;  but  when  the  king  called  out  their  forces  to  join 
his  army,  the  municipal  officers  had  to  get  the  contingent  ready  to 
provide  their  dress  or  badges,  to  appoint  the  captain,  and  to  gather 
in  money  from  the  various  parishes  for  the  soldiers'  pay,  "or  else 
the  constables  to  be  set  in  prison  to  abide  such  time  as  it  be  content 
and  paid."  \Vhen  they  were  sent  to  a  distance  their  fellow-towns- 
men brought  provisions  of  salt  fish  and  paniers  or  bread  boxes  for 
the  carriage  of  their  food,  and  reluctantly  provided  a  scanty  wage, 
which  was  yet  more  reluctantly  doled  out  to  the  soldier  by  his 
officer,  and  perhaps  never  reached  his  pocket  at  all.  Universal 
conscription  proved  then  as  now  the  great  inculcator  of  peace. 
To  the  burgher  called  from  the  loom  and  the  dyeing  pit  and  the 
market  stall  to  take  down  his  bow  or  dagger,  war  was  a  hard  and 
ungrateful  service  where  reward  and  plunder  were  dealt  out  with 
a  niggardly  hand ;  and  men  conceived  a  deep  hatred  of  strife  and 
disorder  of  which  they  had  measured  all  the  misery.  When  the 
common  people  dreamed  of  a  brighter  future,  their  simple  hope 
was  that  every  maker  of  deadly  weapons  should  die  by  his  own 
tools;  for  in  that  better  time  — 

"  Battles  shall  never  eft  (again)  be,  ne  man  bear  edge-tool, 
And  if  any  man  (smithy)  it,  be  smit  therewith  to  death." 


1 88  English   Historians 


§  2.    Mediceval  Police 

Nor  even  in  times  of  peace  might  the  burghers  lay  aside  their 
arms,  for  trouble  was  never  far  from  their  streets.  Every  inhab- 
itant was  bound  to  have  his  dagger  or  knife  or  Irish  "skene,"  in 
case  he  was  called  out  to  the  king's  muster  or  to  aid  in  keeping  the 
king's  peace.  But  daggers  which  were  effective  in  keeping  the 
peace  were  equally  effective  in  breaking  it,  and  the  town  records 
are  full  of  tales  of  brawls  and  riots,  of  frays  begun  by  "railing  with 
words  out  of  reason,"  or  by  "plucking  a  man  down  by  the  hair  of 
his  head,"  but  which  always  ended  in  the  appearance  of  a  short 
dagger,  "and  so  drew  blood  upon  each  other."  For  the  safety 
of  the  community  —  a  safety  which  was  the  recognized  charge 
of  every  member  of  these  simple  democratic  states  —  each  house- 
holder was  bound  to  take  his  turn  in  keeping  nightly  watch  and 
ward  in  the  streets.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  reluctant  citizens  con- 
stantly by  one  excuse  or  another  sought  to  escape  a  painful  and 
thankless  duty :  whether  it  was  whole  groups  of  inhabitants  shel- 
tering themselves  behind  legal  pretexts,  or  sturdy  rebels  breathing 
out  frank  defiance  of  the  town  authorities. 

Thus  in  Aylesbury,  according  to  the  constable's  report,  one 
"Reygg  kept  a  house  all  the  year  till  the  watch  time  came.  And 
when  he  was  summoned  to  the  watch  then  came  Edward  Chalkyll 
'  fasesying  '  and  said  he  should  not  watch  for  no  man  and  thus  bare 
him  up,  and  that  caused  the  other  be  the  bolder  for  to  bar  the 
king's  watch.  .  .  .  He  saith  and  threateneth  us  with  his  mas- 
ter," add  the  constables,  "and  thus  we  be  over  'crakyd'  that  we 
dare  not  go,  for  when  they  be  'mayten  '  they  be  the  bolder."  John 
Bossey  "said  the  same  wise  that  he  would  not  watch  for  us,"  and 
three  others  "lacked  each  of  them  a  night."  But  in  such  cases  the 
mayor's  authority  was  firmly  upheld  by  the  whole  community, 
every  burgher  knowing  well  that  if  any  inhabitant  shirked  his  duty 
a  double  burden  fell  upon  the  shoulder  of  his  neighbor. 

§  3.    Preservation  of  Municipal  Boundaries 

All  inhabitants  of  a  borough  were  also  deeply  interested  in  the 
preservation  of  the  boundaries  which  marked  the  extent  of  their 
dominions,  the  "liberties"  within  which  they  could  enforce  their 
own  law,  regulate  trade,  and  raise  taxes.  Century  after  century 
the  defence  of  the  frontier  remained  one  of  the  urgent  questions  of 
own  politics,  insistent,  perpetually  recurring,  now  with  craft  and 


Town   Life  in  the   Middle  Ages  189 

treachery,  now  with  violence  and  heated  passion  breaking  into 
sudden  flame.  Every  year  the  mayor  and  corporation  made  a 
perambulation  of  the  bounds  and  inspected  the  landmarks;  the 
common  treasure  was  readily  poured  out  if  lawsuits  and  bribes 
were  needed  to  ascertain  and  preserve  the  town's  rights ;  and  if 
law  failed,  the  burghers  fell  back  without  hesitation  on  personal 
force. 

In  Canterbury  the  town  and  the  convent  of  Christ  Church  were 
at  open  war  about  this  question  as  about  many  others.  The  monks 
remained  unconvinced  even  though  the  mayor  and  council  of  thirty- 
six  periodically  "walked  the  bounds,"  giving  copper  coins  at  the 
various  turning  points  to  "divers  children,"  that  they  might  re- 
member the  limits  of  the  franchise,  while  they  themselves  were 
refreshed  after  their  trouble  by  a  "potation  "  in  a  field  near  Ford- 
wich.  At  one  time  the  quarrel  as  to  the  frontier  raged  round  a 
gigantic  ash  tree,  —  the  old  landmark  where  the  liberties  of  the 
city  touched  those  of  Fordwich, —  which  was  in  1499  treacherously 
cut  down  by  the  partisans  of  Christ  Church ;  the  Canterbury  men 
with  the  usual  feastings  and  a  solemn  libation  of  wine  set  up  a  new 
boundary  stone.  At  another  time  the  dispute  shifted  to  where 
at  the  west  gate  of  the  town  the  river  wound  with  uncertain  and 
changing  course  that  left  frontiers  vague  and  undefined.  A  low 
marshy  ground  called  the  "Hosiers"  was  claimed  by  the  mayor  as 
under  his  jurisdiction,  while  the  prior  asserted  that  it  was  within 
the  county  of  Kent,  and  for  thirty  years  the  question  was  fought 
out  in  the  law  courts.  On  July  16,  1500,  the  mayor  definitely 
asserted  his  pretensions  by  gathering  two  hundred  followers 
arrayed  in  manner  of  war  to  march  out  to  the  Rosiers.  There 
certain  monks  and  servants  of  the  prior  were  taking  the  air :  one 
protested  he  had  been  "late  afore  sore  sick  and  was  walking  in  the 
field  for  his  recreation";  another  had  a  sparrow-hawk  on  his  fist, 
and  the  servants  declared  they  were  but  peaceful  haymakers ;  but 
all  had  apparently  gone  out  ready  for  every  .emergency,  for  at  the 
appearance  of  the  enemy  bows  and  arrows,  daggers,  bills,  and 
brigandiers  were  produced  from  under  the  monks'  frocks  and  the 
smocks  of  the  haymakers.  In  the  battle  that  followed  the  monks 
were  beaten,  and  the  citizens  cut  down  willows  and  stocked  up 
the  dike  made  in  the  river  by  the  convent,  and  boldly  proceeded 
the  next  day  to  other  outrages.  The  matter  was  brought  to  judg- 
ment and  a  verdict  given  against  the  mayor  for  riot  —  a  verdict 
which  that  official,  however,  lightly  disregarded.  It  was  in  vain 
that  the  prior,  wealthy  and  powerful  as  he  was,  and  accustomed  to 


190  English   Historians 

so  great  influence  at  court,  appealed  to  the  Star  Chamber  to  have 
the  penalty  enforced,  for  no  further  steps  were  taken  by  the  gov- 
ernment. It  probably  judged  wisely,  since  in  such  a  matter  the 
temper  of  the  citizens  ran  high ;  and  the  rectification  of  frontiers 
was  resented  as  stoutly  as  a  new  delimitation  of  kingdoms  and 
empires  to-day. 

§  4.    Municipal  Lands 

Resolution  in  the  defence  of  their  territory  was  no  doubt  quick- 
ened by  the  sense  which  every  burgess  shared  of  common  prop- 
erty in  the  borough.  The  value  of  woodland  and  field  and  meadow 
which  made  up  the  "common  lands •"  was  well  understood  by  the 
freeman  who  sent  out  his  sheep  or  cows  to  their  allotted  pasture, 
or  who  opened  the  door  of  his  yard  in  the  early  morning  when  the 
common  herd  went  round  the  streets  to  collect  the  swine  and  drive 
them  out  on  the  moor  till  evening.  The  men  of  Romney  did  not 
count  grudgingly  their  constant  labor  and  cost  in  measuring  and 
levelling  and  draining  the  swamps  belonging  to  their  town  and 
protecting  them  from  the  encroachments  of  "the  men  of  the 
marsh"  beyond,  for  the  sake  of  winning  grazing  lands  for  their 
sheep,  and  of  securing  a  "cow-pull"  of  swans  or  cygnets  for  their 
lord  the  archbishop  when  it  was  desirable  "to  have  his  friendship." 

In  poor  struggling  boroughs  like  Preston,  in  large  and  wealthy 
communities  like  Nottingham,  in  manufacturing  towns  like 
Worcester  with  its  busy  population  of  weavers,  in  rich  capitals  like 
York,  in  trading  ports  like  Southampton  where  the  burghers  had 
almost  forgotten  the  free  traditions  of  popular  government,  the 
inhabitants  never  relaxed  their  vigilance  as  to  the  protection  of 
their  common  property.  They  assembled  year  after  year  to  make 
sure  that  there  had  been  no  diminishing  of  their  rights  or  alienation 
of  their  land,  or  that  in  the  periodical  allotments  the  best  fields 
and  closes  had  not  fallen  to  the  share  of  aldermen  and  councillors ; 
and  by  elaborate  constitutional  checks,  or  if  these  failed,  by 
"riotous  assembly  and  insurrection,"  they  denounced  every 
attempt  at  encroachment  on  marsh  or  pasture. 

§  5.    Municipal  Properly  and  Finance 

So  also  in  the  case  of  other  property  which  corporations  held 
for  the  good  of  the  community  —  fisheries,  warrens,  salt-pits, 
pastures  reclaimed  from  the  sea,  plots  of  ground  saved  in  the  dry 


Town   Life  in  the   Middle  Ages  191 

bed  of  a  river,  building  sites  and  all  waste  places  within  the  town 
walls,  warehouses  and  shops  and  tenements,  inns  and  mills,  the 
grassy  slopes  of  the  city  ditch  which  were  let  for  grazing,  the 
towers  of  the  city  walls  leased  for  dwelling  houses  or  store-rooms, 
any  property  bequeathed  to  the  community  for  maintaining  the 
poor  or  repairing  the  walls  or  paying  tolls  and  taxes  —  all  this  cor- 
porate wealth  which  lightened  the  burdens  of  the  taxpayer  was  a 
matter  of  concern  to  every  citizen.  The  people  were  themselves 
joint  guardians  of  the  town  treasure.  Representatives  chosen 
by  the  burghers  kept  one  or  two  of  the  keys  of  the  common  chest, 
which  could  only  be  opened  therefore  with  their  consent. 

Year  after  year  mayor  or  treasurers  were  by  the  town  ordinances 
required  to  present  their  accounts  before  the  assembly  of  all  the 
people  "in  our  whole  community,  by  the  tolling  of  the  common 
bell  calling  them  together  for  that  intent "  •  —  an  assembly  that 
perhaps  gathered  in  the  parish  church  in  which  seats  were  set  up 
for  the  occasion  at  the  public  expense.  There  the  people  heard 
the  lists  of  fines  levied  in  the  courts;  of  tolls  in  the  market,  or 
taxes  taken  at  the  gates  or  in  the  harbor;  of  the  "maltodes,"  or 
sums  paid  on  commodities  for  sale;  of  the  "scot"  levied  on  the 
property  of  individuals ;  of  the  "lyvelode"  or  livelihood,  an  income 
tax  on  rates  or  profits  earned.  They  learned  what  means  the 
corporation  had  taken  of  increasing  the  common  revenue ;  whether 
it  had  ordered  a  "church-ale,"  or  an  exhibition  of  dancing  girls, 
or  a  play  of  Robin  Hood;  what  poor  relief  had  been  given  in  the 
past  year;  what  public  loans  with  judicious  usury  of  over  ten  per 
cent  it  had  allowed,  as  when  in  Lydd  "the  jurats  one  year  lent 
Thomas  Dygon  five  marks  from  the  common  purse  when  going  to 
the  North  Sea,  and  he  repaid  the  same  well  and  trustily  and  paid 
an  increase  thereon  seven  shillings  "  ;  or  they  were  told  whether  the 
town  council  proposed  to  do  a  little  trading  for  the  good  of  the 
community;  and  how  a  "common  barge"  had  been  built  with 
timber  bought  at  one  town,  cables  and  anchors  at  another,  pitch 
and  canvas  at  a  third;  and  how,  when  the  ship  was  finished,  the 
corporation  paid  for  a  modest  supply  of  "bread  and  ale  the  day  the 
mast  was  set  in  the  barge,"  before  it  was  sent  out  to  fish  for  herrings 
or  to  speculate  in  a  cargo  of  salt  or  wine,  for  the  profit  of  the  public 
treasury. 

Lessons  in  common  financial  responsibility  had  been  early 
forced  on  the  burghers  everywhere  by  the  legal  doctrine  that  the 
whole  body  might  be  held  responsible  for  the  debt  of  one  of  its 
members,  while  each  member  on  his  part  was  answerable  for  the 


192  English  Historians 

faults  of  his  fellows,  whether  singly  or  collectively.  Thus  when 
Norwich  failed  in  paying  debts  due  to  the  king  in  1286,  the  sheriff 
of  Norfolk  was  ordered  to  enter  the  liberty  and  distrain  twelve 
of  the  richer  and  more  discreet  persons  of  the  community;  and 
when  the  rent  of  Southampton  was  in  arrears,  one  of  its  burgesses 
was  thrown  into  the  Fleet  in  London.  Under  such  a  system  as  this 
the  ordinary  interest  of  citizens  in  questions  of  taxation  and  ex- 
penditure was  greatly  quickened.  The  municipalities  were  stern 
creditors.  If  a  man  did  not  pay  his  rent  for  the  king's  ferm,  the 
doors  and  windows  of  his  house  were  taken  off,  every  one  in  it 
turned  out,  and  the  house  stood  empty  for  a  year  and  a  day,  or  even 
longer,  before  the  doors  might  be  redeemed  in  full  court,  or  before  it 
passed  to  the  next  heir.  But  it  was  probably  rather  owing  to  the 
happy  circumstances  of  the  English  towns  than  to  the  vigilance  of 
the  burghers  that  there  is  no  case  in  England  of  a  disaster  which 
was  but  too  common  in  France  —  the  disaster  of  a  borough  fall- 
ing into  bankruptcy,  and  through  bankruptcy  into  servitude  and 
political  ruin. 

§  6.    Municipal  Improvements 

In  the  town  communities  of  the  Middle  Ages  all  public  works 
were  carried  out  by  what  was  in  fact  forced  labor  of  the  whole 
commonalty.  If  the  boroughs  suffered  little  from  government 
interference,  neither  could  they  look  for  help  in  the  way  of  state 
aid  or  state  loans;  and  as  the  burgher's  purse  in  early  days  was 
generally  empty,  he  had  to  give  of  the  work  of  his  hands  for  the 
common  good.  In  Nottingham,  "booners" — that  is,  the  burgesses 
themselves  or  substitutes  whom  they  provided  to  take  their  place  — 
repaired  the  highways  and  kept  the  streets  in  order.  The  great 
trench  dug  at  Bristol  to  alter  the  course  of  the  Frome  was  made 
"by  the  manoeuvre  of  all  the  commonalty  as  well  of  Redcliffe 
ward  as  of  the  town  of  Bristol."  When  Hythe  in  1412  sent  fora 
Dutch  engineer  to  make  a  new  harbor,  all  the  inhabitants  were 
called  out  in  turn  to  help  at  the  "Delveys"  or  diggings.  Sundays 
and  week  days  alike  the  townsmen  had  to  work,  dining  off  bread 
and  ale  provided  by  the  corporation  for  the  diggers,  and  if  they 
failed  to  appear  they  were  fined  fourpence  a  day.  In  the  same  way 
Sandwich  engaged  a  Hollander  to  superintend  the  making  of  a  new 
dike  for  the  harbor;  the  mayor  was  ordered  to  find  three  work- 
men to  labor  at  it,  every  jurat  two,  and  each  member  of  the  com- 
mon council  one  man;  while  all  other  townsmen  had  to  give 
labor  or  find  substitutes  according  to  their  ability.  The  jurats 


Town  Life  in  the  Middle  Ages  193 

were  made  overseers,  and  were  responsible  for  the  carrying  out  of 
the  work,  and  so  successfully  was  the  whole  matter  managed  that 
in  1512  the  Sandwich  haven  was  able  to  give  shelter  to  five  hun- 
dred or  six  hundred  hoys. 

§  7.    Appeals  to  Public  Charity 

Forced  labor  such  as  this  could,  of  course,  only  be  applied  to 
works  where  skilled  artificers  were  not  necessary;  but  occasions 
soon  multiplied  when  the  town  mob  had  to  be  replaced  by  trained 
laborers,  and  we  already  see  traces  of  a  transitional  system  in  the 
making  of  the  Hythe  harbor,  where  the  municipality  had  to 
engage  hired  labor  for  such  work  as  could  not  be  done  by  the 
burgesses.  But  undertakings  for  which  scientific  skill  was  needed 
sorely  taxed  local  resources,  and  the  burghers  were  driven  to 
make  anxious  appeals  to  public  charity.  In  1447,  when  Bridport 
wanted  to  improve  its  harbor,  collectors  were  sent  all  over  the 
country  to  beg  for  money;  indulgences  of  forty  or  a  hundred 
days  were  promised  to  subscribers  by  archbishops  and  bishops; 
and  a  copy  of  the  paper  carried  by  one  of  the  collectors  gives  the 
sum  of  the  masses  said  for  them  in  the  year  as  amounting  to  nearly 
four  thousand :  "the  sum  of  all  other  good  prayers  no  man  know- 
eth  save  only  God  alone."  The  building  and  repairing  of  bridges 
as  being  also  work  that  demanded  science  and  skilled  labor  in- 
volved serious  cost.  When  the  king  had  allowed  the  bridge  at 
Nottingham  to  fall  into  the  river,  he  generously  transferred  its 
ownership  and  the  duty  of  setting  it  up  again  to  the  townspeople, 
who  appointed  wardens  and  kept  elaborate  accounts  and  bore 
grievous  anxiety,  till  finding  its  charges  worse  than  all  their  ordi- 
nary town  expenses  they  at  last  fell  to  begging  also.  So  also  the 
mayor  of  Exeter  prayed  for  help  in  the  matter  of  the  bridge  there, 
which  had  been  built  by  a  wealthy  mayor  and  was  "of  the  length 
or  nigh  by,  and  of  the  same  mason  work  as  London  Bridge,  hous- 
ing upon  except ;  the  which  bridge  openly  is  known  the  greatest 
costly  work  and  most  of  alms-deeds  to  help  it  in  all  the  west  part 
of  England."  Such  instances  reveal  to  us  the  persistent  difficul- 
ties that  beset  a  world  where  primitive  methods  utterly  failed  to 
meet  new  exigencies,  and  where  the  demand  for  technical  quality 
in  work  was  beginning  to  lead  to  new  organizations  of  labor. 
Meanwhile  the  burghers  had  to  fight  their  own  way  with  no  hope 
of  grants  in  aid  from  the  state,  and  little  to  depend  on  save  the 
personal  effort  of  the  whole  commonalty. 


194  English  Historians 

§  8.   Mediaval  Municipal  Gaieties 

The  townspeople  all  took  their  part  not  only  in  the  serious  and 
responsible  duties  of  town  life,  but  apparently  in  an  incessant 
round  of  gaieties  as  well.  All  the  commons  shared  in  supporting 
the  minstrels  and  players  of  the  borough.  The  "waits "  (so  called 
from  the  French  word  guet)  were  originally  and  still  partly  re- 
mained watchmen  of  the  town ;  but  it  was  in  their  character  of 
minstrels,  "who  go  every  morning  about  the  town  piping,"  that 
they  were  paid  by  pence  collected  by  the  wardmen  from  every 
house.  Every  town,  moreover,  had  its  particular  play,  which  was 
acted  in  the  Town  Hall,  or  the  churchyard,  before  the  mayor 
and  his  brethren  sitting  in  state,  while  the  whole  town  kept  holi- 
day. In  1411  there  was  a  great  play,  From  the  Beginning  oj  the 
World,  at  the  Skinner's  Well  in  London,  "that  lasted  seven  days 
continually,  and  there  were  the  most  part  of  the  lords  and  gentles 
of  England."  At  Canterbury  the  chief  play  was  naturally  The 
Martyrdom  of  St.  Thomas.  The  cost  is  carefully  entered  in  the 
municipal  account  books  —  charges  for  carts  and  wheels,  floor- 
ing, hundreds  of  nails,  a  mitre,  two  bags  of  leather  containing 
blood  which  was  made  to  spout  out  at  the  murder,  linen  cloth  for 
St.  Thomas'  clothes,  tin  foil  and  gold  foil  for  the  armor,  pack- 
thread and  glue,  coal  to  melt  the  glue,  alb  and  amys,  knights' 
armor,  the  hire  of  a  sword,  the  painting  of  St.  Thomas'  head,  an 
angel  which  cost  22d.  and  flapped  his  wings  as  he  turned  every 
way  on  a  hidden  wynch  with  wheels  oiled  with  soap.  When  all 
was  over  the  properties  of  the  pageant  were  put  away  in  the  barn 
at  St.  Sepulchre's  Nunnery  and  kept  safely  till  the  next  year  at  a 
charge  of  i6</.  The  Canterbury  players  also  acted  in  the  Three 
Kings  o/  Cologne  at  the  Town  Hall,  where  the  kings,  attended  by 
their  henchmen,  appeared  decorated  with  strips  of  silver  and  gold 
paper  and  wearing  monks'  frocks.  The  three  "beasts"  for  the 
Magi  were  made  out  of  twelve  ells  of  canvas  distended  with  hoops 
and  laths,  and  "painted  after  nature";  and  there  was  a  castle 
of  painted  canvas  which  cost  3$.  4<2.  The  artist  and  his  helpers 
worked  for  six  days  and  nights  at  these  preparations  and  charged 
three  shillings  for  their  labor,  food,  fire,  and  candle. 

Minstrels  and  harpers  and  pipers  and  singers  and  play-actors, 
who  stayed  at  home  through  the  dark  winter  days  "from  the  feast 
of  All  Saints  to  the  feast  of  the  Purification,"  to  make  music  and 
diversion  for  their  fellow-citizens,  started  off  on  their  travels  when 
the  fine  weather  came,  and  journeyed  from  town  to  town  giving 


Town  Life  in  the  Middle  Ages  195 

their  performances,  and  rewarded  at  the  public  expense  with  a 
gift  of  6s.  Sd.  or  35.  ^d.,  and  with  dinner  and  wine  "for  the  honor 
of  the  town."  It  was  an  easy  life  — 

"  Some  mirth  to  make  as  minstrels  conneth  (know), 
That  will  neither  swynke  (toil)  nor  sweat,  but  swear  great  oaths, 
And  find  up  foul  fantasies  and  fools  them  maken, 
And  have  wit  at  will  to  work  if  they  would." 

Entries  in  the  town  accounts  of  Lydd  give  some  idea  of  the  con- 
stant visits  of  these  wandering  troops,  and  of  the  charges  which 
they  made  upon  the  town  treasure.  Players  from  Romney  came 
times  without  number,  others  from  Rukinge,  Wytesham,  Herne, 
Hamme,  Appledore,  Stone,  Folkestone,  Rye;  and  besides  these 
came  the  minstrels  of  the  great  lords,  the  king,  the  Duke 
of  Somerset,  the  Duke  of  Buckingham,  Lord  De  Bourchier,  Lord 
Fiennes,  the  Earl  of  Warwick,  the  Duke  of  York,  Lord  Arundel, 
Lord  Exeter,  Lord  Shrewsbury,  the  Earl  of  Pembroke,  Lord 
Dacres,  etc.,  all  of  whom  doubtless  the  town  dared  not  refuse 
to  entertain,  but  "for  love  of  their  lords  lythen  (listen  to)  them  at 
feasts."  Besides  this  Lydd  had  its  own  special  plays,  The  May 
and  The  Interlude  of  our  Lord's  Passion,  and  the  whole  town 
would  gather  on  a  Sunday  to  hear  the  actors,  while  watchmen 
were  paid  to  keep  guard  on  the  shore  against  a  surprise  of  the 
French.  Its  players  seem  to  have  set  the  fashion  in  the  neighbor- 
hood; the  Romney  Corporation  "chose  wardens  to  have  the  play 
of  Christ's  Passion,  as  from  olden  time  they  were  wont  to  have 
it,"  and  paid  the  expenses  of  a  man  to  go  to  Lydd  "to  see  the 
original  of  our  play  there,"  besides  giving  the  Lydd  players  a 
reward  of  20$.  for  their  performance. 

Other  wanderers,  too,  knocked  at  the  gates  of  Lydd  —  "the 
man  with  the  dromedary,"  "a  bear-ward,"  or  the  keeper  of  the 
king's  lions  travelling  with  his  menagerie  and  demanding  a  sheep 
to  be  given  to  the  lions ;  archers  and  wrestlers  from  neighboring 
towns  whom  jurats  and  commons  gathered  to  see,  and  supplied 
with  wrestling  collars  and  food  for  themselves  and  their  horses,  as 
well  as  a  "reward"  at  the  public  expense.  Besides  bull-baiting, 
Lydd,  doubtless  like  other  towns,  had  its  occasional  "bear- 
baiting."  There  were  the  Christmas  games  and  mumming,  and 
the  yearly  visit  of  the  "Boy  Bishop"  of  St.  Nicholas,  who  came 
from  Romney  to  hold  his  feast  at  Lydd.  And  there  was  the  uni- 
versal festival  of  the  "watch"  on  St.  John's  eve,  when  Lydd  paid 
out  of  its  common  chest  for  the  candles  kept  burning  all  night 


196  English  Historians 

in  the  Common  House,  and  for  the  feast,  not  a  trifling  expense, 
if  we  may  judge  by  the  case  of  Bristol,  where  the  crafts  who  took 
part  in  the  watch  divided  among  them  ninety-four  gallons  of  wine. 

This  festival  was  observed  everywhere,  but  other  local  feasts 
were  arranged  according  to  local  traditions.  In  Canterbury  every 
mayor  was  bound  "to  keep  the  watch"  on  the  Eve  of  the  Trans- 
lation of  St.  Thomas.  "And  in  the  aforesaid  watch  the  sheriff 
to  ride  in  harness  with  a  henchman  after  him  honestly  emparelled 
for  the  honor  of  the  same  city.  And  the  mayor  to  ride  at  his  pleas- 
ure, and  if  the  mayor's  pleasure  be  to  ride  in  harness,  the  aldermen 
to  ride  in  like  manner,  and  if  he  ride  in  his  scarlet  gown,  the 
aldermen  to  ride  after  the  same  watch  in  scarlet  and  crimson 
gowns."  The  city  was  to  be  lighted  by  the  mayor  finding  "two 
cressets,  or  six  torches,  or  more  at  his  pleasure,"  every  alderman 
finding  two  cressets,  and  each  of  the  common  council  with  every 
constable  and  town  clerk  one  cresset.  In  Chester  the  great  day 
for  merry-making  was  Shrove  Tuesday,  when  the  drapers,  saddlers, 
shoemakers,  and  many  others  met  at  the  cross  on  the  Roodeye, 
and  there  in  the  presence  of  the  mayor  the  shoemakers  gave  to 
the  drapers  a  football  of  leather  "to  play  at  from  thence  to  the 
Common  Hall."  The  saddlers  at  the  same  time  gave  "every 
master  of  them  a  painted  ball  of  wood  with  flowers  and  arms  upon 
the  point  of  a  spear,  being  goodly  arrayed  upon  horseback  accord- 
ingly." The  whole  town  joined  in  the  sports,  and  every  one  mar- 
ried within  the  year  gave  some  contribution  toward  their  funds. 

To  these  festivities  we  must  add  the  yearly  pageants  of  the 
gilds,  whether  of  the  great  societies  like  the  Gild  of  St. 
George  of  Norwich,  whose  alderman  in  scarlet  robe  followed  by 
the  four  hundred  members  with  their  distinguishing  red  hoods, 
marched  after  the  sword  of  wood  with  a  dragon's  head  for  the 
handle  which  had  been  presented  to  them  by  Henry  the  Fifth, 
or  of  the  Corpus  Christi  Gild,  which  evidently  played  a  political 
part  in  the  life  of  every  great  town.  In  York  it  is  said  to  have 
had  in  the  sixteenth  century  nearly  fifteen  thousand  members, 
and  at  its  great  pageant  the  mayor  and  town  council  "and  other 
worshipful  persons"  joined  in  a  common  feast,  and  sent  wine 
and  fruits  at  the  public  expense  to  great  nobles  and  ladies  in  the 
city,  till  perhaps  supplies  ran  out  and  the  town  was  "drunken 
dry."  The  craft  gilds  also,  whether  voluntarily  or  by  order  of 
the  corporation,  had  their  pageants  acting  the  same  play  year 
after  year. 

It  has  been  commonly  supposed  that  the  English  people  had 


Town  Life  in  the  Middle  Ages  197 

in  the  later  Middle  Ages  a  passion  for  pageantry  and  display  which 
was  one  of  the  strongest  forces  in  maintaining  their  gild  organi- 
zation. But  towards  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century  at  least  it 
becomes  less  and  less  clear  that  the  free  will  of  the  craftsmen  had 
much  to  say  as  to  the  maintenance  of  these  public  gaieties,  or  that 
they  felt  any  enthusiasm  for  amusements  which  yearly  grew  more 
expensive  and  burdensome.  There  were  places  where  the  crafts, 
whether  through  poverty  or  economy,  neglected  to  spend  a  due 
proportion  of  their  earnings  on  the  public  festivals,  and  in  one 
town  after  another  as  popular  effort  declined  the  authorities  began 
to  urge  the  people  on  to  the  better  fulfilment  of  their  duties.  In 
1490  a  complaint  was  made  in  Canterbury  that  the  Corpus  Christi 
Play,  the  City  Watch  on  St.  Thomas'  Eve,  and  the  Pageant  of 
St.  Thomas  had  fallen  into  decay.  Some  mayors,  indeed,  "in 
their  year  have  full  honorably  kept  the  said  watch  " ;  but  others 
had  neglected  it,  and  "all  manner  of  harness  within  the  city  is 
decayed  and  rusted  for  lack  of  the  yearly  watch."  It  was  there- 
fore decreed  that  every  mayor  should  henceforth  "keep  the  watch," 
and  that  the  crafts  who  apparently  hoped  to  escape  from  the 
heavy  charges  of  these  plays  by  declaring  themselves  too  poor  to 
be  formed  into  a  corporate  body,  should  forthwith  be  grouped 
together  into  a  sort  of  confederation  or  give  up  their  bodies  for 
punishment. 

In  the  same  way  when  the  tailors  of  Plymouth  were  incorporated 
in  1496,  they  had  to  bind  themselves  to  provide  a  pageant  every 
year  on  Corpus  Christi  Day  for  the  benefit  of  the  Corpus  Christi 
Gild,  and  so  on  in  many  other  towns.  Occasionally,  indeed,  the 
corporation  took  a  different  and  more  merciful  line;  for  the 
mayor  and  sheriffs  of  Norwich  petitioned  the  lords  and  commons 
to  pass  an  act  or  order  to  prevent  players  of  interludes  from 
coming  into  the  city,  as  they  took  so  large  a  share  of  the  earnings 
of  the  poor  operatives  as  to  cause  great  want  to  their  families 
and  a  heavy  charge  to  the  city,  and  Bridgenorth  got  an  order  from 
Elizabeth  that  the  town  might  no  longer  pay  players  or  bear- 
wards;  whoever  wanted  to  see  such  things,  must  see  them  "upon 
their  own  costs  and  charges." 

On  the  whole,  it  is  evident  that  long  before  the  Reformation,  and 
even  when  as  yet  no  Puritan  principles  had  been  imported  into  the 
matter,  the  gaiety  of  the  towns  was  already  sobered  by  the  pressure 
of  business  and  the  increase  of  the  class  of  depressed  workers. 
It  was  not  before  the  fanaticism  of  religion,  but  before  the  coming 
in  of  new  forms  of  poverty  and  of  bondage,  that  the  old  games  and 


198  English  Historians 

pageants  lost  their  lustre  and  faded  out  of  existence,  save  where  a 
mockery  of  life  was  preserved  to  them  by  compulsion  of  the  town 
authorities.  And  the  town  authorities  were  probably  acting  under 
pressure  of  the  publicans  and  licensed  victuallers.  Cooks  and 
brewers  and  hostellers  were  naturally  deeply  interested  in  the 
preservation  of  the  good  old  customs,  and  it  was  in  some  cases, 
certainly  this  class,  the  most  powerful  in  a  mediaeval  borough, 
who  raised  the  protest  against  the  indifference  and  neglect  of  the 
townspeople  for  public  processions  and  merry-making,  because 
"thereby  the  victuallers  lose  their  money,"  and  who  insisted  on 
the  revival  of  these  festivals  for  the  encouragement  of  trade. 
Probably  where  the  crafts  were  strong  and  the  votes  of  the  working 
people  carried  the  day,  the  decision  turned  the  other  way. 

§  9.   The  Church  as  a  Centre  of  Town  Life 

All  the  multitudinous  activities  and  accidents  of  this  common 
life  were  summed  up  for  the  people  in  the  parish  church  that 
stood  in  their  market-place,  close  to  the  Common  House  or  Gild 
Hall.  This  was  the  fortress  of  the  borough  against  its  enemies  — 
its  place  of  safety  where  the  treasure  of  the  commons  was  stored 
in  dangerous  times,  the  arms  in  the  steeple,  the  wealth  of  corn  or 
wool  or  precious  goods  in  the  church  itself,  guarded  by  a  sentence 
of  excommunication  against  all  who  should  violate  so  sacred  a 
protection.  Its  shrines  were  hung  with  the  strange  new  things 
which  English  sailors  had  begun  to  bring  across  the  great  seas  — 
with  "horns  of  unicorns,"  ostrich  eggs,  or  walrus  tusks,  or  the 
rib  of  a  whale  given  by  Sebastian  Cabot.  From  the  church  tower 
the  bell  rang  out  which  called  the  people  to  arm  for  the  com- 
mon defence  or  summoned  a  general  assembly  or  proclaimed  the 
opening  of  the  market.  Burghers  had  their  seats  in  the  church 
apportioned  to  them  by  the  corporation  in  the  same  rank  and  order 
as  the,  stalls  which  it  had  already  assigned  to  them  in  the  market- 
place. 

The  city  officers  and  their  wives  sat  in  the  chief  places  of  honor ; 
next  to  them  came  tradesmen  according  to  their  degree  with  their 
families  honorably  "y-parroked  (parked)  in  pews,"  where  Wrath 
sat  among  the  proud  ladies  who  quarrelled  as  to  which  should 
first  receive  the  holy  bread;  while  "apprentices  and  servants 
shall  sit  or  stand  in  the  alleys."  There  on  Sundays  and  feast- 
days  the  people  came  to  hear  any  news  of  importance  to  the  com- 
munity, whether  it  was  a  list  of  strayed  sheep,  or  a  proclamation 


Town  Life  in  the  Middle  Ages  199 

by  the  bailiff  of  the  penalties  which  had  been  decreed  in  the  manor 
court  against  offenders.  The  church  was  their  common  hall, 
where  the  commonalty  met  for  all  kinds  of  business,  to  audit 
the  town  accounts,  to  divide  the  common  lands,  to  make  grants  of 
property,  to  hire  soldiers,  or  to  elect  a  mayor.  There  the  council 
met  on  Sundays  or  festivals,  as  might  best  suit  their  convenience; 
so  that  we  even  hear  of  a  payment  made  by  the  priest  to  the  cor- 
poration to  induce  them  not  to  hold  their  assemblies  in  the  chancel 
while  high  mass  was  being  performed.  It  was  the  natural  place 
for  justices  to  sit  and  hear  cases  of  assault  and  theft,  or  it  might 
serve  as  a  hall  where  difficult  legal  questions  could  be  argued  out 
by  lawyers. 

In  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  century,  when  the  bishop  and  the 
mayor  of  Exeter  were  in  the  height  of  a  fierce  contest  about  the 
government  of  the  town,  they  met  for  discussion  in  the  cathedral. 
"When  my  lord  had  said  his  prayers  at  the  high  altar  he  went 
apart  to  the  side  altar  by  himself  and  called  to  him  apart 
the  mayor  and  no  more,  and  there  communed  together  a  great 
while."  And  on  this  common  ground  the  dean  and  chapter 
on  the  one  side  and  the  mayor  and  town  council  on  the  other, 
attended  by  their  respective  lawyers,  fought  out  the  questions  of 
law  on  which  the  case  turned.  In  fair  time  the  throng  of  traders 
expected  to  be  allowed  to  overflow  from  the  High  Street  into  the 
cathedral  precincts,  and  were  "ever  wont  and  used  ...  to  lay 
open,  buy,  and  sell  divers  merchandises  in  the  said  church  and 
cemetery  and  special  in  the  king's  highway  there  as  at  Wells, 
Salisbury,  and  other  places  more,  as  dishes,  bowls,  and  other 
things  like,  and  in  the  said  church  ornaments  for  the  same  and 
other  jewels  convenient  thereto."  In  a  draft  presentation  to  a 
London  vicarage  of  1427  there  is  a  written  memorandum  with 
an  order  from  the  king  that  no  fairs  or  markets  shall  be  held  in 
sanctuaries,  "for  the  honor  of  Holy  Church."  Edward  the  First 
had  indeed  forbidden  such  fairs  in  his  statute  of  merchants;  but 
such  an  order  was  little  in  harmony  with  the  habits  and  customs 
of  the  age;  and  if  there  was  an  occasional  stirring  of  conscience 
in  the  matter,  it  was  not  till  the  time  of  Laud  that  the  public 
attained  to  a  conviction,  or  acquiesced  in  an  authoritative  asser- 
tion that  the  Church  was  desecrated  by  the  transaction  in  it  of 
common  business. 

In  the  Middle  Ages,  however,  the  townspeople  were  connected 
with  their  parish  Church  after  a  fashion  which  lias  long  been  un- 
known among  us.  They  were  frequently  the  lay  rectors ;  they 


2OO  English   Historians 

appointed  the  wardens  and  churchwardens;  they  had  control 
of  the  funds  and  the  administration  of  lands  left  for  maintaining 
its  services  and  fabric;  sometimes  they  laid  claim  to  the  fees 
paid  for  masses.  The  popular  interest  might  even  extend  to  the 
criticism  and  discipline  of  the  rector,  so  that  in  Bridport  an  inquiry 
of  the  bishop  as  to  whether  his  chaplain,  "a  foreigner  from  Brit 
tany,"  was  "drunk  every  day  "  was  held  in  presence  of  "a  copious 
multitude  of  the  parishioners,"  and  twelve  townsmen  acted  as 
witnesses.  If  a  religious  gild  had  become  identified  with  the 
corporation,  the  town  body  and  the  Church  were  united  by  a  yet 
closer  tie.  The  corporation  of  Plymouth,  which  on  its  other  side 
was  the  Gild  of  Our  Lady  and  St.  George,  issued  its  instructions 
even  as  to  the  use  of  vestments  in  St.  Andrews,  ruling  when  "the 
best  copes  and  vestments"  should  be  used  at  funerals,  and  how 
"the  second  blue  copes  "  only  might  be  displayed  at  the  burial  of 
any  man  who  died  without  leaving  to  the  Church  an  offering  of 
twenty  shillings. 

The  people  on  their  side  were  taxed,  and  heavily  taxed,  for  the 
various  expenses  of  the  Church.  Sergeants  sent  by  the  town 
Council  collected  under  severe  penalties  the  dues  for  the  blessed 
bread  and  "trendilles"  of  wax  or  "light-silver"  for  the  lights 
burned  beside  dead  bodies  laid  in  the  church,  and  the  town  treas- 
ury paid  for  "coals  for  the  new  fire  on  Easter  Eve."  If  a  church 
had  to  be  repaired  or  rebuilt,  the  pressure  of  spiritual  hopes  or 
fears,  the  habit  of  public  duty,  the  boastfulness  of  local  pride, 
all  the  influences  that  might  stimulate  the  common  effort  were 
raised  to  their  highest  efficiency  by  the  watchful  care  of  the  corpora- 
tion. All  necessary  orders  were  sent  out  by  the  mayor,  who  with 
the  town  council  determined  the  share  which  the  inhabitants 
were  to  take  in  the  work ;  and  in  small  and  destitute  parishes  where 
the  principle  of  self-help  and  independence  was  quite  as  fully 
recognized  as  it  was  in  bigger  and  richer  towns,  real  sacrifices 
were  demanded.  Men  gave  their  money  or  their  labor  or  the 
work  of  their  horse  and  cart,  or  they  offered  a  sheep  or  fowls, 
or  perhaps  rings  and  personal  ornaments. 

In  the  pride  of  their  growing  municipal  life  the  poorest  boroughs 
built  new  towers  and  hung  new  chimes  worthy  of  the  latest  popu- 
lar ideals.  The  inhabitants  of  Totnes  were  so  poor  that  in  1449 
there  were  only  three  people  in  the  town  who  paid  as  much  as 
twenty  pence  for  the  tax  of  half-tenths  and  fifteenths  for  the  king. 
But  since  Totnes  had  four  new  bells  which  had  been  anointed  and 
consecrated  in  1442,  it  decided  that  the  old  wooden  belfry  of  the 


Town  Life  in  the  Middle  Ages  201 

parish  church  should  be  replaced  by  a  new  stone  tower.  A  master 
mason  was  appointed  in  1448,  and  "supervisors"  were  chosen  to 
visit  the  bell  towers  of  all  the  country  round  and  to  make  that  at 
Totnes  "according  to  the  best  model."  The  proctors  of  the 
church  provided  shovels  and  pick-axes,  and  the  parishioners 
were  called  out  to  dig  stones  from  the  quarry ;  every  one  who  had 
a  horse  was  to  help  in  carrying  the  stones,  "but  without  coercion;" 
while  "those  who  have  no  horses  of  their  own  are  to  work  with 
the  horses  of  other  persons,  but  at  their  own  cost." 

Last  of  all  an  ordinance  was  made  that  the  mayor,  vicar,  and 
proctors  of  the  church  should  go  round  to  each  parishioner  and 
see  how  much  he  would  give  to  the  collection  on  Sundays  for  the 
bell  tower,  and  those  who  contributed  nothing  were  to  have  their 
names  entered  on  a  roll  and  sent  to  the  archdeacon's  court.  When 
St.  Andrews  at  Plymouth  was  enlarged,  the  town  authorities  de- 
cided that  the  money  should  be  collected  by  means  of  a  yearly 
"church-ale."  Taverns  were  closed  by  order  of  the  council  on  a 
certain  day,  and  every  wafd  of  the  town  made  for  itself  a  "hale" 
or  booth  in  the  cemetery  of  the  parish  church.  All  inhabitants  of 
the  wards  were  commanded  to  come  with  as  many  friends  and 
acquaintances  as  possible  "for  the  increasing  of  the  said  ale," 
and  to  bring  with  them  "except  bread  and  drink  such  victual  as 
they  like  best" ;  but  they  must  buy  at  the  "hale,"  "bread  and  ale 
as  it  cometh  thereto  for  their  dinners  and  suppers  the  same  day." 
After  ten  years  of  these  picnics  in  the  churchyard  the  new  aisle 
of  St  Andrews  was  finished  at  a  cost  of  £44  145.  6d. 

§  10.    Unity  of  Interests  and  Public  Spirit  in  the  Mediaval  Town 

In  the  midst  of  this  busy  life  —  a  life  where  the  citizens  them- 
selves watched  over  -their  boundaries,  defended  their  territory, 
kept  peace  in  their  borders,  took  charge  of  the  common  property, 
governed  the  spending  of  the  town  treasure,  labored  with  their 
own  hands  at  all  public  works,  ordered  their  own  amusements  — 
the  mediaeval  burgher  had  his  training.  The  claims  of  the  common- 
wealth were  never  allowed  to  slip  from  his  remembrance.  As  all 
the  affairs  of  the  town  were  matters  of  public  responsibility,  so 
all  the  incidents  of  its  life  were  made  matters  of  public  knowledge. 
The  ancient  "common  horn"  or  the  "common  bell"  announced 
the  opening  of  the  market,  or  the  holding  of  the  mayor's  court, 
or  called  the  townspeople  together  in  time  of  danger.  Criers  went 
about  the  streets  to  proclaim  the  ordinances  of  the  community,  and 


2O2  English  Historians 

to  remind  the  citizens  of  their  duties.  From  the  church  stile  or 
in  the  market-place  they  summoned  men  to  the  king's  muster,  or 
called  them  to  their  place  in  the  town's  ship  or  barge;  or  if  danger 
from  an  enemy  threatened,  warned  the  citizens  "to  have  harness 
carried  to  the  proper  places,"  or  "to  have  cattle  or  hogs  out  of 
the  fields."  They  exhorted  the  people  "to  leave  dice-playing," 
"to  cease  ball-playing,  and  to  take  to  bows" ;  to  shut  the  shops  at 
service  time ;  "  to  have  water  at  men's  doors  "  for  fear  of  fire.  The 
crier  "called  any  proclamation  of  the  king  in  the  public  places 
of  the  town ;  he  declared  deeds  of  pardon  granted  to  any  criminal 
or  proclaimed  that  some  poor  wretch  who  had  taken  sanctuary  in 
the  church  had  abjured  the  kingdom  and  was  to  be  allowed  to 
depart  safely  through  the  streets.  Perhaps  the  "cry"  was  made 
that  a  prisoner  had  been  thrown  into  the  town  jail  on  suspicion, 
and  accusers  were  called  to  appear  if  they  had  any  charge  to  bring 
against  him ;  or  it  was  announced  that  the  will  of  a  deceased  towns- 
man was  about  to  be  proved  in  the  courthouse,  if  there  were 
any  who  desired  to  raise  objections;  6r  there  was  proclamation 
that  a  burghei  had  offended  against  the  laws  of  the  community 
and  was  degraded  from  the  freedom  of  the  town,  or  perhaps  ban- 
ished forever  from  its  territory.  At  other  times  players  and  min- 
strels would  pass  through  the  market-place  and  streets  "crying 
the  banns"  of  their  plays.  The  merchant,  the  apprentice,  the 
journeyman,  the  shopkeeper,  gathered  in  the  same  crowd  to  hear 
the  crier  who  recorded  every  incident  in  the  town  life  or  brought 
tidings  of  coming  change.  News  was  open,  public,  without  dis- 
tinction of  persons. 

Where  the  claims  of  local  life  were  so  exacting  and  so  overpower- 
ing we  can  scarcely  wonder  if  the  burgher  took  little  thought  for 
matters  that  lay"  beyond  his  "parish."  But  within  the  narrow 
limits  of  the  town  dominions  his  experience  was  rich  and  varied. 
While  townsmen  were  forced  at  every  turn  to  discover  and  justify 
the  limits  of  their  privileges,  or  while  controversies  raged  among 
them  as  to  how  the  government  of  the  community  should  be  carried 
on,  there  was  no  lack  of  political  teaching;  and  all  questions 
"touching  the  great  commonalty  of  the  city"  for  whose  liberties 
they  had  fought  and  whose  constitution  they  had  shaped,  stirred 
loyal  citizens  to  a  genuine  patriotism.  Traders  too,  intent  on  the 
development  of  their  business,  were  deeply  concerned  in  all  the 
questions  that  affected  commerce,  the  securing  of  communica- 
tions, the  opening  of  new  roads  for  trade,  or  the  organization 
of  labor.  In  such  matters  activity  could  never  sleep ;  for  the  towns 


Town   Life  in  the   Middle  Ages  203 

anticipated  modern  nations  in  the  faith  that  the  advantage  of  one 
community  must  be  the  detriment  of  another,  and  competition 
and  commercial  jealousy  ran  high.  Never  perhaps  in  English 
history  was  local  feeling  so  strong.  Public  virtue  was  summed  up 
in  an  ardent  municipal  zeal,  as  lively  among  the  "Imperial  Co- 
citizens"  of  New  Sarum  as  among  the  "Great  Clothing"  of  bigger 
boroughs.  In  those  days,  indeed,  busy  provincials  but  dimly  con- 
scious of  national  policy  found  in  the  confusion  of  court  politics 
and  the  distraction  of  its  intrigues,  or  in  the  feuds  of  a  divided  and 
bewildered  administration,  no  true  call  to  national  service  and  no 
popular  leader  to  quicken  their  sympathies. 

Civil  wars  which  swept  over  the  country  at  the  bidding  of  a 
factious  group  of  nobles  or  of  a  vain  and  unscrupulous  kingmaker 
left,  and  justly  left,  the  towns  supremely  indifferent  to  any  ques- 
tion save  that  of  how  to  make  the  best  terms  for  themselves  from 
the  winning  side,  or  to  use  the  disasters  of  warring  lords  so  as 
to  extend  their  own  privileges.  Meanwhile  in  the  intense  effort 
called  out  by  the  new  industrial  and  commercial  conditions  and 
the  reorganization  of  social  life  which  they  demanded,  it  was 
inevitable  that  there  should  grow  up  in  the  boroughs  the  temper 
of  men  absorbed  in  a  critical  struggle  for  ends  which  however 
important  were  still  personal,  local,  limited,  purely  material  — 
a  temper  inspired  by  private  interest  and  with  its  essential  narrow- 
ness untouched  by  the  finer  conceptions  through  which  a  great 
patriotism  is  nourished.  Such  a  temper,  if  it  brought  at  first 
great  rewards,  brought  its  own  penalties  at  last,  when  the  towns, 
self-dependent,  unused  to  confederation  for  public  purposes, 
destitute  of  the  generous  spirit  of  national  regard,  and  by  their 
ignorance  and  narrow  outlook  left  helpless  in  presence  of  the 
revolutions  that  were  to  usher  in  the  modern  world,  saw  the  govern- 
ment of  their  trade  and  the  ordering  of  their  constitutions  taken 
from  them,  and  their  councils  degraded  by  the  later  royal  despot- 
ism into  the  instruments  and  support  of  tyranny. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE   CHURCH  IN  THE   MIDDLE  AGES 

No  student  of  mediaeval  history  can  neglect  the  Church  both 
as  an  institutional  expression  of  the  religious  life  of  the  age  and 
as  a  body  of  men  occupying  a  position  of  great  power  by  means 
of  their  possessions,  their  learning,  and  their  spiritual  authority. 
The  hierarchy  of  the  Church  in  England,  its  cardinal  doc- 
trines, its  claims  over  the  moral  and  secular  life  of  man,  its 
contests  with  the  kings  for  power,  its  relations  with  the  See  of 
Rome  —  these  and  many  more  problems  of  fundamental  impor- 
tance confront  the  student  who  would  understand  the  forces  at 
work  in  mediaeval  society.  In  the  language  of  Professor  Mait- 
land,  the  Church  of  Christendom  "was  a  wonderful  system.  The 
whole  of  Western  Europe  was  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  one 
tribunal  of  last  resort,  the  Roman  curia.  Appeals  were  encour- 
aged by  all  manner  of  means,  appeals  at  almost  every  stage  of 
almost  every  proceeding.  •  But  the  pope  was  far  more  than  the 
president  of  a  court  of  appeal.  Very  frequently  the  courts  Chris- 
tian which  did  justice  in  England  were  acting  under  his  supervision 
and  carrying  out  his  written  instructions.  A  very  large  part  and 
by  far  the  most  permanently  important  part  of  the  ecclesiastical 
litigation  that  went  on  in  the  country  came  before  English  prelates 
who  were  sitting  not  as  judges  ordinary,  but  as  mere  delegates  of 
the  pope,  commissioned  to  hear  and  determine  this  or  that  par- 
ticular case.  Bracton,  indeed,  treats  the  pope  as  the  ordinary 
judge  of  every  Englishman  in  spiritual  things,  and  the  only  ordi- 
nary judge  whose  powers  are  unlimited."  For  the  various  features 
of  the  English  mediaeval  Church  as  an  institution,  every  student 
must  turn  to  the  weighty  pages  of  Dr.  Stubbs,  whose  profound 

204 


The  Church  in  the  Middle  Ages  205 

historical  knowledge  and  ecclesiastical  training  peculiarly  fitted 
him  for  the  task  of  writing  on  this  complicated  subject. 

§  i.    The  Spirituality  of  England  as  an  Organization  within  the 

State1 

In  approaching  the  history  of  the  mediaeval  church,  we  may 
regard  the  spirituality  of  England,  the  clergy  or  clerical  estate, 
as  a  body  completely  organized,  with  a  minutely  constituted  and 
regulated  hierarchy,  possessing  the  right  of  legislating  for  itself 
and  taxing  itself,  having  its  recognized  assemblies,  judicature,  and 
executive,  and,  although  not  as  a  legal  corporation  holding  common 
property,  yet  composed  of  a  great  number  of  persons  each  of  whom 
possesses  corporate  property  by  a  title  which  is  either  conferred 
by  ecclesiastical  authority,  or  is  not  to  be  acquired  without  eccle- 
siastical assent.  The  spirituality  is  by  itself  an  estate  of  the 
realm;  its  leading  members,  the  bishops  and  certain  abbots, 
are  likewise  members  of  the  estate  of  baronage ;  the  inferior  clergy, 
if  they  possess  lay  property  or  temporal  endowments,  are  likewise 
members  of  the  estate  of  the  commons. 

The  property  which  is  held  by  individuals  as  officers  and  minis- 
ters of  the  spirituality  is  either  temporal  property  —  that  is,  lands 
held  by  ordinary  legal  services,  or  spiritual  property  —  that  is, 
tithes  and  oblations.  As  an  estate  of  the  realm  the  spirituality 
recognizes  the  headship  of  the  king;  as  a  member  of  the  Church 
Catholic  it  recognizes,  according  to  the  mediaeval  idea,  the  head- 
ship of  the  pope.  Its  own  chief  ministers,  the  bishops  under  their 
two  metropolitans  and  under  the  primacy  of  the  Church  of  Canter- 
bury, stand  in  an  immediate  relation  to  both  these  powers,  and 
the  inferior  clergy  have  through  the  bishops  a  mediate  relation, 
while  as  subjects  and  as  Catholic  Christians  they  have  also  an 
immediate  relation  to  both  king  and  pope.  They  recognize  the 
king  as  supreme  in  matters  temporal,  and  the  pope  as  supreme 
in  matters  spiritual ;  but  there  are  questions  as  to  the  exact  limits 
between  the  spiritual  and  the  temporal,  and  most  important 
questions  touching  the  precise  relations  between  the  crown  and 
the  papacy.  In  mediaeval  theory  the  king  is  a  spiritual  son  of 
the  pope;  and  the  pope  may  be  the  king's  superior  in  things 
spiritual  only,  or  in  things  spiritual  and  temporal  alike. 

1  Stubbs,  Constitutional  History  of  England,  Vol.  Ill,  chap.  xix.  By 
permission  of  the  Delegates  of  the  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford. 


206  English  Historians 


§  2.    Temporal  Superiority  oj  the  Papacy 

The  temporal  superiority  of  the,  papacy  may  be  held  to  depend 
upon  two  principles:  the  first  is  embodied  in  the  general  propo- 
sition asserted  by  Gregory  VII  and  his  successors  that  the  pope  is 
supreme  over  temporal  sovereigns;  the  spiritual  power  is  by  its 
very  nature  superior  to  the  temporal,  and  of  that  spiritual  power 
the  pope  is  on  earth  the  supreme  depository.  This  proposition 
may  be  accepted  or  denied,  but  it  implies  a  rule  equally  applicable 
to  all  kingdoms.  The  second  principle  involves  the  claim  to 
special  superiority  .over  a  particular  kingdom^such  as  was  at  differ- 
ent times  made  by  the  popes  in  reference  to  England,  Scotland, 
Ireland,  Naples,  and  the  empire  itself,  and  turns  upon  the  special 
circumstances  of  the  countries  so  claimed.  These  two  principles 
are  in  English  history  of  unequal  importance:  the  first,  resting 
upon  a  dogmatic  foundation  has,  so  far  as  it  is  recognized  at  all, 
a  perpetual  and  semi-religious  force;  the  latter,  resting  upon 
legal  assumptions  and  historical  acts,  has  more  momentary  promi- 
nence, but  less  real  significance. 

The  claim  of  the  pope  to  receive  homage  from  William  the 
Conqueror,  on  whatever  it  was  based,  was  rejected  by  the  king, 
and  both  he  and  William  Rufus  maintained  their  right  to  deter- 
mine which  of  the  two  contending  popes  was  entitled  to  the  obe- 
dience of  the  English  Church.  Henry  II,  when  he  received  Ire- 
land as  a  gift  from  Adrian  IV,  never  intended  to  admit  that  the 
papal  power  over  all  islands  inferred  from  the  donation  of  Con- 
stantine  could  be  understood  so  as  to  bring  England  under  the 
direct  authority  of  Rome;  nor  when,  after  Becket's  murder,  he 
declared  his  adhesion  to  the  pope,  did  he  contemplate  more  than 
a  spiritual  or  religious  relation.  John's  surrender  and  subsequent 
homage  first  created  the  shadow  of  a  feudal  relation,  which  was 
respected  by  Henry  III,  but  repudiated  by  the  Parliaments  of 
Edward  I  and  Edward  III,  and  passed  away,  leaving  scarcely  a 
trace  under  the  later  kings.  .  .  . 

§  3.   Election  of  Bishops 

Whatever  was  the  precise  nature  of  the  papal  supremacy,  the 
highest  dignity  in  the  hierarchy  of  the  national  Church  was  under- 
stood to  belong  to  the  Church  of  Canterbury,  of  which  the  arch- 
bishop was  the  head  and  minister ;  he  was  alterius  orbis 


The  Church  in  the  Middle  Ages  207 

he  was  likewise,  and  in  consequence,  the  first  constitutional  adviser 
of  the  crown.  The  Archbishop  of  York  and  the  bishops  shared, 
in  a  somewhat  lower  degree,  both  his  spiritual  and  his  temporal 
authority;  like  him  they  had  large  estates  which  they  held  of  the 
king,  seats  in  the  national  council,  preeminence  in  the  national 
synod,  and  places  in  the  general  councils  of  the  Church.  The 
right  of  appointing  the  bishops  and  of  regulating  their  powers 
was  thus  one  of  the  first  points  upon  which  the  national  Church, 
the  crown,  and  the  papacy  were  likely  to  come  into  collision. 

The  cooperation  of  clergy  and  laity  in  the  election  of  bishops 
before  the  Conquest  has  been  already  illustrated.  The  struggle 
between  Henry  I  and  Anselm  on  the  question  of  investiture  ter- 
minated in  a  compromise;  the  king  gave  up  his  claim  to  invest 
with  staff  and  ring ;  the  archbishop  undertook  that  no  bishop  elect 
should  be  disqualified  for  consecration  by  the  fact  that  he  had  done 
homage  to  the  king.  Although  Henry  retained  the  power  of  nomi- 
nating to  the  vacant  sees,  the  compact  resulted  in  a  shadowy 
recognition  of  the  right  of  canonical  election  claimed  by  the  chap- 
ters of  the  cathedrals,  and  exercised  occasionally  under  the  royal 
dictation;  to  the  metropolitan,  of  course,  belonged  consecration 
and  the  bestowal  of  the  spiritualities ;  temporal  property  and 
authority  were  received  from  the  royal  hands.  Stephen  at  his 
accession  more  distinctly  recognized  the  rule  of  canonical  sub- 
stitution, and  in  his  reign  the  clergy  contended  with  some  success 
for  their  rights. 

Henry  II  and  Richard  observed  the  form  of  election  under 
strict  supervision,  and  John,  shortly  before  he  granted  the  great 
charter,  issued  as  a  bribe  to  the  bishops  a  shorter  charter  con- 
firming the  right  of  free  election,  subject  to  the  royal  license  and 
approval,  neither  of  which  was  to  be  withheld  without  just  cause. 
This  charter  of  John  may  be  regarded  as  the  fullest  and  final 
recognition  of  the  canonical  right  which  had  been  maintained  as 
the  common  law  of  the  Church  ever  since  the  Conquest ;  which  had 
been  ostensibly  respected  since  the  reign  of  Henry  I ;  and  which 
the  crown,  however  often  it  evaded  it,  did  not  henceforth  attempt 
to  override. 

The  earlier  practice,  recorded  in  the  Constitutions  of  Clarendon, 
according  to  which  the  election  was  made  in  the  curia  regis,  in 
a  national  council,  or  in  the  royal  chapel  before  the  justiciar,  a 
relic  perhaps  of  the  custom  of  nominating  the  prelates  in  the 
Witenagemot,  was  superseded  by  this  enactment:  the  election 
took  place  in  the  chapter-house  of  the  cathedral,  and  the  king's 


2o8  English  Historians 

wishes  were  signified  by  letter  or  message,  not  as  before  by  direct 
dictation.  When  the  elected  prelate  had  obtained  the  royal  assent 
to  his  promotion,  the  election  was  examined  and  confirmed  by 
the  metropolitan;  and  the  ceremony  of  consecration  completed 
the  spiritual  character  of  the  bishop.  On  his  confirmation,  the 
elected  prelate  received  the  spiritualities  of  his  see,  the  right  of 
ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  in  his  diocese,  which  during  the  vacancy 
had  been  in  the  hands  of  the  archbishop  or  of  the  chapter;  and 
at  his  consecration  he  made  a  profession  of  obedience  to  the  arch- 
bishop and  the  metropolitan  Church.  From  the  crown,  before 
or  after  consecration,  he  received  the  temporalities  of  his  see,  and 
thereupon  made  to  the  king  a  promise  of  fealty  answering  to  the 
homage  and  fealty  of  a  temporal  lord. 

§  4.   The  Pope  and  Ecclesiastical  Appointments 

It  was  not  until  the  thirteentlj_century  that  the  popes  began 
to  interfere  directly  in  tfie  appointment  to  the  suffragan  sees. 
Over  the  metropolitans  they  had  long  before  attempted  to  exer- 
cise a  controlling  influence,  in  two  ways:  by  the  gift  of  the  pall 
and  by  the  institution  of  legations.  The  pall  was  a  sort  *of  collar 
of  white  wool,  with  pendent  stripes  before  and  behind,  embroidered 
with  four  purple  crosses.  The  lambs  from  whose  wool  it  was  made 
were  annually  presented  by  the  nuns  of  St.  Agnes,  blessed  by  the 
pope,  and  kept  under  the  care  of  apostolic  subdeacons;  and  the 
pall,  when  it  was  ready  for  use,  was  again  blessed  at  the  tomb  of 
St.  Peter  and  left  there  all  night.  It  was  presented  to  the  newly 
appointed  metropolitans  at  first  as  a  compliment,  but  it  soon  began 
to  be  regarded  as  an  emblem  of  metropolitan  power,  and  by  and  by 
to  be  accepted  as  the  vehicle  by  which  metropolitan  power  was 
conveyed. 

The  bestowal  of  the  pall  was  in  its  origin  Byzantine,  the  right 
to  wear  some  such  portion  of  the  imperial  dress  having  been  be- 
stowed by  the  emperor  on  his  patriarchs:  in  the  newer  form  it 
had  become  a  regular  institution  before  the  foundation  of  the 
English  Church ;  St.  Gregory  sent  a  pall  to  Augustine,  and  so  im- 
portant was  the  matter  that,  even  after  the  breach  with  Rome, 
Archbishop  Holdegate  of  York  in  1545  went  through  the  form  of 
receiving  one  from  Cranmer.  Until  he  received  the  pall  the  arch- 
bishop did  not,  except  under  very  peculiar  circumstances,  venture 
to  consecrate  bishops.  On  the  occasion  of  its  reception  he  had 
to  swear  obedience  to  the  pope  in  a  form  which  gradually  became 


The  Church  in  the  Middle  Ages  209 

more  stringent;  in  early  times  he  undertook  a  journey  to  Rome 
for  the  purpose;  but  after  the  time  of  Lanfranc  the  pall  was 
generally  brought  by  special  envoys  from  the  apostolic  see,  and  a 
great  ceremony  took  place  on  the  occasion  of  the  investiture. 
This  transaction  formed  a  very  close  link  between  the  archbishop 
and  the  pope,  and,  although  the  pall  was  never  refused  to  a  duly 
qualified  candidate,  the  claim  of  a  discretion  to  give  or  refuse  in 
fact  attributed  to  the  pope  a  power  of  veto  on  the  elections  made 
by  national  churches  and  sovereigns.  .  .  . 

By  the  statute  of  pro  visors,  in  1351,  it  was  enacted  that  all 
persons  receiving  papal  provisions  should  be  liable  to  imprison- 
ment, and  that  all  the  preferments  to  which  the  pope  nominated 
should  be  forfeit  for  that  turn  to  the  king.  But  even  this  bold 
measure,  in  which  the  good  sense  of  the  Parliament  condemned 
the  proceedings  of  the  pope,  was  turned  by  royal  manipulation 
to  the  advantage  of  the  crown  alone.  A  system  was  devised  which 
saved  the  dignity  of  all  parties.  When  a  see  became  vacant,  the 
king  sent  to  the  chapter  his  license  to  elect,  accompanied  or 
followed  by  a  letter  nominating  the  person  whom  he  would  accept 
if  elected.  He  also,  by  letter  to  the  pope,  requested  that  the 
same  person  might  be  appointed  by  papal  provision.  With  equal 
complaisance  the  chapters  elected  and  the  popes  provided.  The 
pope  retained,  however,  the  nomination  to  sees  vacant  by  trans- 
lation, which  vacancies  he  took  care  to  multiply.  This  arrange- 
.  ment  was  very  displeasing  to  the  country,  for  the  question  of 
patronage,  in  other  cases  besides  bishoprics,  was  becoming  com- 
plicated to  an  extreme  degree ;  the  king  presented  to  livings  which 
were  not  vacant,  and  displaced  incumbents  by  his  writ  of  quare 
impedit;  the  pope's  right  of  reservation  affected  the  tenure  of  every 
benefice  in  the  country. 

At  length,  after  long  debates  by  way  of  letter,  in  1374,  a  congress 
was  held  at  Bruges  for  determining  the  general  question;  in  1375 
Gregory  XI  annulled  the  appointments  which  he  and  his  prede- 
cessor had  made  in  opposition  to  the  king,  and  in  1377  Edward 
was  able  to  announce  that  whilst  he  himself  gave  up  certain  pieces 
of  patronage,  the  pope  had  by  word  of  mouth  undertaken  to  abstain 
from  reservations  and  to  allow  free  elections  to  bishoprics.  But 
this  promise  was  as  illusory  as  all  that  had  gone  before.  The 
troubles  of  the  next  reign  prevented  England  from  taking  advan- 
tage, as  might  have  been  expected,  of  the  weakness  of  the  papacy, 
now  in  a  state  of  schism.  Richard  and  his  opponents  were  alike 
intent  rather  on  using  the  papal  influence  for  their  own  ends  than 


English   Historians 

on  securing  the  freedom  of  the  Church.  In  1388  Urban  VI,  at  the 
instance  of  the  lords,  translated  Alexander  Neville  from  York  to 
St.  Andrews,  and  Thomas  Arundel  from  Ely  to  York.  Such  a 
breach  of  law  would  in  ordinary  times  have  called  forth  a  loud 
protest,  but  party  spirit  was  rampant,  and  none  was  heard.  In 
1390  the  statute  of  provisors  was  reenacted  and  confirmed,  and 
in  1393  the  great  statute  of  praemunire  secured,  for  the  time,  the 
observance  of  the  statute  of  provisors.  In  1395  the  election  to 
Exeter  was  made  without  papal  interference,  but  in  1396  the  bishops 
of  Worcester  and  St.  Asaph  were  appointed  by  provision ;  and  in 
1397  Richard  procured  the  pope's  assistance  in  translating  Arundel 
to  St.  Andrews,  and  in  appointing  Walden  to  Canterbury ;  Boniface 
IX,  the  same  year,  translated  Bishop  Bockingham  from  Lincoln 
to  Lichfield  against  his  own  will,  and  appointed  Henry  Beaufort 
in  his  place. 

Archbishop  Arundel  and  Henry  IV  managed  the  episcopal 
appointments  during  the  latter  years  of  the  great  schism;  and 
Henry  V,  among  the  other  pious  acts  by  which  he  earned  the 
support  of  the  clergy,  recognized  the  elective  rights  of  the  chapters, 
the  Parliament  also  agreeing  that  the  confirmation  of  the  election 
should,  during  the  vacancy  of  the  apostolic  see,  be  performed  as 
it  had  been  of  old  by  the  metropolitans.  For  two  or  three  years 
the  whole  of  the  long  disused  process  was  revived  and  the  Church 
was  free.  But  Martin  V,  when  he  found  himself  seated  firmly 
on  his  throne,  was  not  content  to  wield  less  power  than  his  prede- 
cessors had  claimed.  He  provided  thirteen  bishops  in  two  years, 
and  threatened  to  suspend  Chichele's  legation  because  he  was 
unable  to  procure  the  repeal  of  the  restraining  statutes.  An 
attempt  of  the  pope,  however,  to  force  Bishop  Fleming  into  the  See 
of  York  was  signally  defeated. 

The  weakness  and  devotion  of  Henry  VI  laid  him  open  to  much 
aggression;  during  the  whole  of  Stafford's  primacy  the  pope 
filled  up  the  sees  by  provision ;  the  council  nominated  their  candi- 
dates ;  at  Rome  the  proctors  of  the  parties  contrived  a  compromise; 
whoever  otherwise  lost  or  gained,  the  apostolic  see  obtained  a 
recognition  of  its  claim.  During  the  latter  years  of  our  period 
the  deficiency  of  records  makes  it  impossible  to  determine  whether 
the  exercise  of  that  claim  was  real  or  nominal ;  certainly  the  kings 
had  no  difficulty  in  obtaining  the  promotion  of  their  creatures; 
a  few  Italian  absentees  were,  on  the  other  hand,  allowed  to  hold 
sees  in  England  and  act  as  royal  agents  at  Rome.  Under  Henry 
VII  and  Henry  VIII  the  royal  nominees  were  invariably  chosen; 


The  Church  in  the   Middle  Ages  211 

the  popes  had  other  objects  in  view  than  the  influencing  of  the 
national  churches,  and  the  end  of  their  spiritual  domination  was 
at  hand.  The  clergy,  too,  were  unable  to  stand  alone  against 
royal  and  papal  pressure  and  placed  themselves  at  the  disposal 
of  the  government;  the  government  was  ready  to  use  them,  and 
paid  for  their  service  by  promotion.  .  .  . 

§  5.    National  Legislation  and  Papal  Jurisdiction 

The  statute  of  praemunire  was  intended  to  prevent  encroach- 
ments on  and  usurpations  of  royal  jurisdiction.  The  ordinance 
of  1353,  which  was  enrolled  as  a  "statute  against  annullers  of 
judgments  in  the  king's  courts,"  condemns  to  outlawry,  for- 
feiture, and  imprisonment  all  persons  who,  having  prosecuted  in 
foreign  courts  suits  cognizable  by  the  law  of  England,  should  not 
appear  in  obedience  to  summons,  and  answer  for  their  contempt. 
The  name  pnemunire,  which  marks  this  form  of  legislation,  is 
taken  from  tRe  opening  word  of  the  writ  by  which  the  sheriff  is 
charged  to  summon  the  delinquent.  It  is  somewhat  curious  that 
the  court  of  Rome  is  not  mentioned  in  this  first  act  of  pramunire; 
as  the  assembly  by  which  it  was  framed  was  not  a  proper  parlia- 
ment, it  may  not  have  been  referred  to  the  lords  spiritual;  their 
assent  is  not  mentioned.  The  act,  however,  of  1365,  which  con- 
firms the  statute  of  provisors,  distinctly  brings  the  suitors  in  the 
papal  courts  under  the  provisions  of  the  ordinance  of  1353,  and 
against  this  the  prelates  protested. 

In  spite  of  the  similar  protest  in  1393,  the  Parliament  passed  a 
still  more  important  statute,  in  which  the  word  prcemunire  is  used 
to  denote  the  process  by  which  the  law  is  enforced.  This  act, 
which  is  one  of  the  strongest  defensive  measures  taken  during  the 
Middle  Ages  against  Rome,  was  called  for  in  consequence  of  the 
conduct  of  the  pope,  who  had  forbidden  the  bishops  to  execute 
the  sentences  of  the  royal  courts  in  suits  connected  with  patronage. 
The  political  translations  of  the  year  1388  were  adroitly  turned 
into  an  argument;  the  pope  had  translated  bishops  against  their 
own  will  to  foreign  sees,  and  had  endangered  the  freedom  of  the 
English  crown,  "which  hath  been  so  free  at  all  times  that  it  hath 
been  in  subjection  to  no  earthly  sovereign,  but  immediately  sub- 
ject to  God  and  no  other,  in  all  things  touching  the  regalie  of  the 
said  crown."  The  lords  spiritual  had  admitted  that  such  en- 
croachments were  contrary  to  the  right  of  the  crown,  and  promised 
to  stand  by  the  king.  It  was  accordingly  enacted  that  all  persons 


212  English   Historians 

procuring  in  the  court  of  Rome  or  elsewhere  such  translations, 
processes,  sentences  of  excommunication,  bulls,  instruments, 
or  other  things  which  touch  the  king,  his  crown,  regality,  or  realm, 
should  suffer  the  penalties  of  pra?munire.  The  legislation  exem- 
plified in  the  statutes  of  praemunire  and  provisors  was  not  a  mere 
brutiim  julmen;  although  evaded  by  the  kings,  —  notably,  by 
Richard  himself  in  the  translation  of  Arundel  to  St.  Andrew's  in 
1397,  —  and,  so  far  at  least  as  the  statute  of  provisors  was  con- 
cerned, suspended  from  time  to  time  by  consent  of  the  Parliament, 
it  was  felt  by  the  popes  to  be  a  great  check  on  their  freedom  of 
action ;  it  was  used  by  Gloucester  as  a  weapon  against  Beaufort ; 
the  clergy,  both  under  papal  influence  .and  independently,  peti- 
tioned from  time  to  time  for  its  repeal ;  and  in  the  hands  of  Henry 
VIII  it  became  a  lever  for  the  overthrow  of  papal  supremacy. 
It  furnishes  in  ecclesiastical  history  the  clew  of  the  events  that 
connect  the  Constitutions  of  Clarendon  with  the  Reformation; 
and,  if  in  a  narrative  of  the  internal  history  of  the  constitution 
itself  it  seems  to  take  a  secondary  place,  it  is  only  because  the  influ- 
ences which  it  was  devised  to  check  were  everywhere  at  work, 
and  constant  recurrence  to  their  potent  action  would  involve  two 
separate  readings  of  the  history  of  every  great  crisis  and  every 
stage  of  growth. 

§  6.    Convocations  0}  the  English  Clergy 

The  convocations  of  the  two  provinces  as  the  recognized  con- 
stitutiolfal  assemblies  of  the  English  clergy  have  undergone,  ex- 
cept in  the  removal  of  the  monastic  members  at  the  dissolution,  no 
change  of  organization  from  the  reign  of  Edward  I  down  to  the 
present  day.  The  clergy,  moreover,  are  still,  by  the  pramunicnles 
clause  in  the  parliamentary  writ  of  the  bishops,  orTteTecl  to  attend 
by  their  proctors  at  the  session  of  Parliament.  On  both  these 
points  enough  has  been  said  in  former  chapters;  and  here  it  is 
necessary  only  to  mention  the  particulars  in  which  external  press 
ure  was  applied  to  multiply  meetings  or  accelerate  proceedings. 
The  clergy  from  the  very  first  showed  great  reluctance  to  obey  the 
royal  summons  under  the  prcetnitnientes  clause,  and  accordingly 
during  a  great  part  of  the  reigns  of  Edward  II  and  Edward  III, 
from  the  year  1314  to  the  year  1340,  a  separate  letter  was  addressed 
to  the  two  archbishops  at  the  calling  of  each  Parliament,  urging 
them  to  compel  the  attendance  of  the  clerical  estate.  This  was 
ineffectual ;  and  after  the  latter  year  the  crown,  having  acquiesced 


The  Church  in  the   Middle  Ages  213 

in  the  rule  that  the  clerical  tenths  should  be  granted  in  the  pro- 
vincial convocations,  seems  to  have  cared  less  about  the  attendance 
of  representative  proctors  in  Parliament.  On  two  or  three  critical 
occasions  the  clerical  proctors  were  called  on  to  share  the  respon- 
sibilities of  Parliament ;  but  their  attendance  ceased  to  be  more 
than  formal,  and  probably  from  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth 
century  ceased  altogether. 

With  regard  to  the  constitution  of  the  convocations,  the  only 
question  which  has  taken  its  place  in  political  history  is  that  of 
their  relation  to  Parliament;  and  this  question  affects  only  those 
sessions  of  convocation  which  were  held  in  consequence  of  a  re- 
quest or  a  command  issued  by  the  king  with  a  view  to  a  grant  of 
money.  The  organization  of  the  two  provincial  assemblies  was 
applicable  to  all  sorts  of  public  business,  and  the  archbishops  seem 
to  have  encountered  no  opposition  from  the  king  on  any  occasion 
on  which  they  thought  it  necessary  to  call  their  clergy  together. 
The  means  to  be  taken  for  the  extirpation  of  heresy,  for  the  reform 
of  manners,  for  the  dealings  with  foreign  churches  and  general 
councils,  might  be,  and  no  doubt  were,  generally  concerted  in  such 
assemblies.  Archbishop  Arundel  and  his  successors  held  several 
of  these  councils,  which  are  not  to  be  distinguished  from  the  con- 
vocations called  at  the  king's  request  in  any  point  except  that  they 
were  called  without  any  such  request. 

As  however  parliaments  and  convocations  had  this  much  in 
common,  that  the  need  of  pecuniary  aid  was  the  king's  chief 
reason  for  summoning  them,  it  might  naturally  be  expected  that, 
when  a  Parliament  was  called ,  the  convocations  would  at  no  great 
distance  of  time  be  summoned  to  supplement  its  liberality  with  a 
clerical  gift.  We  have  seen  how  regularly  this  function  was  dis- 
charged during  the  fifteenth  century,  and  how  the  clerical  grant 
followed  in  due  proportion  the  grant  of  the  laity.  But  although  in 
nearly  every  case  there  is  a  session  of  convocation  to  match  the 
session  of  Parliament,  the  session  of  convocation  cannot  be  re- 
garded as  an  adjunct  'of  Parliament.  Archbishop  Wake,  in  his 
great  controversy  with  Atterbury,  showed  from  an  exhaustive 
enumeration  of  instances  that,  even  where  the  purpose  of  the  two 
assemblies  was  the  same,  there  was  no  such  close  dependence  of 
the  convocation  upon  the  Parliament  as  was  usual  after  the  changes 
introduced  by  Henry  VIII. 

The  king  very  seldom  even  suggests  the  day  for  the  meeting  of 
convocation ;  its  sessions  and  adjournments  take  place  quite  irre- 
spective of  those  of  Parliament;  very  rare  attempts  are  made  to 


214  English  Historians 

interfere  with  its  proceedings  even  when  they  are  unauthorized  by 
the  royal  writ  of  request;  and,  after  the  accession  of  the  House  of 
Lancaster,  they  are  not  interfered  with  at  all.  On  the  side  of  the 
papacy,  interference  could  scarcely  be  looked  for.  As  a  legate 
could  exercise  no  jurisdiction  at  all  without  royal  license,  a  legatine 
council  could  not  be  held  in  opposition  to  the  king's  will ;  but  the 
days  of  legatine  councils  of  the  whole  national  Church  seemed  at  all 
events  to  be  over;  there  is  no  trace  of  any  important  meeting  of 
such  assembly  between  the  days  of  Arundel  and  those  of  Wolsey; 
although,  after  the  date  at  which  both  archbishops  acquired  the 
legatine  character,  both  the  provincial  convocations  might  be  in- 
vidiously represented  as  legatine  councils.  .  .  . 

§  7.    National  Legislation  Relating  to  the  Church 

The  several  legislative  measures  by  which  at  various  times  the 
crown  or  the  Parliament  endeavored  to  regulate  the  proceedings 
of  the  national  Church  may  be  best  arranged  by  reference  to  the 
particular  subject-matter  of  the  acts.  They  are  important  con- 
stitutional muniments,  but  are  not  very  numerous  or  diversified. 
First  among  them  come  the  ordinances  or  statutes  by  which  the 
tenure  of  church  property  was  defined  and  its  extension  limited. 
The  establishment  of  the  obligation  of  homage  and  fealty  due  for 
the  temporalities  or  lands  of  the  clergy  was  the  result  oi  a  com- 
promise  between  Henry  I  and  Anselm,  and  it  was  accordingly  not 
so  much  an  enact'lrrent-mede-by  the  secular  power  against  the 
ecclesiastical  as  a  concordat  betwixt  the  two. 

It  was  not  so  with  the  mortmain  act,  or  with  the  series  of  pro- 
visions in  which  the  statute  "de  religiosis"  was  prefigured,  from 
the  great  charter  downwards.  To  forbid  the  acquisition  of  lands 
by  the  clergy,  without  the  consent  of  the  overlord  of  whom  the 
lands  were  held,  was  a  necessary  measure  and  one  to  which  a 
patriotic  ecclesiastic  like  Langton  would  have  had  no  objection 
to  "urge.  But  the  spirit  of  the  clergy  had  very  much  changed 
between  1215  and  1279,  and  the  statute  "de  religiosis,"  which  was 
not  so  much  an  act  of  Parliament  as  a  royal  ordinance,  was  issued 
at  a  moment  when  there  was  much  irritation  of  feeling  between 
the  king  and  the  archbishop.  It  was  an  efficient  limitation  on  the 
greed  of  acquisition,  and  although  very  temperately  administered 
by  the  kings,  who  never  withheld  their  license  from  the  endowment 
of  any  valuable  new  foundation,  it  was  viewed  with  great  dislike 
by  the  popes,  who  constantly  urged  its  repeal,  and  by  the  monks 


The  Church  in  the  Middle  Ages  215 

whose  attempts  to  frustrate  the  intention  of  the  law  by  the  inven- 
tion of  trusts  and  uses,  are  regarded  by  the  lawyers  as  an  important 
contribution  to  the  land-law  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

Other  instances  of  legislation  less  directly  affecting  the  lands 
of  the  Church  were  the  acts  by  which  the  estates  of  the  Templars 
were  transferred  to  the  Hospitallers,  and  the  many  enactments  from 
the  reign  of  Edward  III  downwards,  by  which  the  estates  of  the 
alien  priories  were  vested  in  the  king.  Beyond  these,  however, 
which  are  mere  instances  of  the  use  of  a  constitutional  power,  it 
is  certain  that  not  only  the  parliaments  but  the  crown  and  the 
courts  of  law  exercised  over  the  lands  of  the  clergy  the  same  power 
that  they  exercised  over  all  other  lands;  they  were  liable  to  tem- 
porary confiscation  in  case  of  the  misbehavior  of  their  owners, 
to  taxation,  and  the  constrained  performance  of  the  due  services; 
and  although  they  were  not  liable  to  legal  forfeiture,  as  their 
possessors  could  be  deprived  of  no  greater  right  in  them  than  was 
involved  in  their  official  tenure,  they  might  be  detained  in  the  royal 
hands  on  one  pretext  or  another  for  long  periods  without  legal 
remedy. 

The  patronage  of  parish  churches  was  likewise  a  temporal  right, 
and,  although  the  ecclesiastical  courts  made  now  and  then  a  vain 
claim  to  determine  suits  concerning  it,  it  was  always  regarded  as 
within  the  province  of  state  legislation.  The  spiritual  revenues  of 
the  clergy,  the  tithes  and  offerings  which  were  the  endowment  of 
the  parochial  churches,  were  subject  to  a  divided  jurisdiction ;  the 
title  to  ownership  was  determined  by  the  common  law,  the  enforce- 
ment of  payment  was  left  to  the  ecclesiastical  courts.  The  at- 
tempts of  the  Parliament  to  tax  the  spiritualities  were  very  jealously 
watched,  and  generally,  if  not  always,  defeated.  The  Parliament, 
however,  practically  vindicated  its  right  to  determine  the  nature 
of  the  rights  of  the  clergy  to  tithe  of  underwood,  minerals,  and 
other  newly  asserted  or  revived  claims.  In  1362  a  statute  fixed  the 
wages  of  stipendiary  chaplains. 

A  second  department  in  which  the  spirituality  was  subjected  to 
the  legislative  interference  of  the  State  was  that  of  judicature.  In 
this  region  a  continual  rivalry  was  carried  on  from  the  Conquest  to 
the  Reformation,  the  courts  of  the  two  powers,  like  all  courts  of  law, 
being  prone  to  make  attempts  at  usurpation,  and  the  interference 
of  the  crown  as  the  fountain  of  justice,  or  of  the  Parliament  as 
representing  the  nation  at  large,  being  constantly  invoked  to 
remedy  the  evils  caused  by  mutual  aggression.  Of  the  defining 
limits  of  this  legislation,  the  "articuli  cleri"  of  1316,  and  the  writ 


216  English  Historians 

of  "circumspecte  agatis,"  neither  of  them  exactly  or  normally 
statutes,  are  the  chief  landmarks.  In  order  to  avoid  repetition,  we 
may  defer  noticing  these  disputes  until  we  come  to  the  general 
question  of  judicature.  .  .  . 

§  8.    Ecclesiastical  Jurisdiction 

We  come  to  the  last  of  our  constitutional  inquiries,  that  of 
judicature:  the  subject  of  jurisdiction  of,  by,  and  for  the  clergy, 
which  has  been  through  the  whole  period  of  English  history  one  of 
the  most  important  influences  on  the  social  condition  of  the  nation, 
the  occasion  of  some  of  its  most  critical  experiences,  and  one  of  its 
greatest  administrative  difficulties.  In  the  very  brief  notice  which 
can  be  here  given  to  it,  it  will  be  necessary  to  arrange  the  points 
which  come  before  us  under  the  following  heads:  first,  the  juris- 
diction exercised  by  the  secular  courts  over  ecclesiastical  persons 
and  causes;  secondly,  the  jurisdiction  exercised  by  the  spiritual 
courts  over  laymen  and  temporal  causes ;  thirdly,  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  spiritual  courts  over  the  clergy;  and  fourthly,  the  judicial 
claims  and  recognized  authority  on  judicial  matters  of  the  pope  of 
Rome. 

All  suits  touching  the  temporalities  of  the  clergy  were  subject 
to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  king's  courts,  and  against  so  reasonable 
a  rule  scarcely  any  traces  of  resistance  on  the  part  of  the  clergy  are 
found.  Yet  it  is  not  improbable  that  during  the  quarrels  of  the 
twelfth  century  some  question  on  the  right  of  the  bishop  to  try 
such  suits  may  have  arisen.  Glanville  gives  certain  forms  of 
prohibition  in  which  the  ecclesiastical  judges  are  forbidden  to 
entertain  suits  in  which  a  lay  fee  is  concerned ;  and  Alexander  III, 
in  a  letter  addressed  to  the  bishops  in  1178,  directed  them  to  ab- 
stain from  hearing  such  causes,  the  exclusive  jurisdiction  of  which 
belonged  to  the  king.  In  reference  to  lands  held  in  frankalmoign, 
disputes  between  clergymen  belonged  to  the  ecclesiastical  courts; 
but  the  question  whether  the  land  in  dispute  was  held  by  this 
tenure  or  as  a  lay  fee  was  decided  by  a  recognition  under  the  king's 
writ. 

The  jurisdiction  as  to  tithes  was  similarly  a  debateable  land 
between  the  two  jurisdictions,  the  title  to  the  ownership,  as  in 
questions  of  advowson  and  presentation,  belonging  to  the  secular 
courts,  and  the  process  of  recovery  belonging  to  the  court  Christian. 
The  right  of  defining  matters  titheable  was  claimed  by  the  arch- 
bishops in  their  constitutions,  but  without  much  success,  the  local 


The  Church  in  the  Middle  Ages  217 

custom  and  prescription  being  generally  received  as  decisive  in 
the  matter.  The  right  of  patronage  was  determined  in  the  king's 
courts.  In  each  of  these  departments,  however,  some  concert 
with  the  ecclesiastical  courts  was  indispensable ;  many  issues  of 
fact  were  referred  by  the  royal  tribunals  to  the  court  Christian  to  be 
decided  there,  and  the  interlacing,  so  to  speak,  of  the  two  juris- 
dictions was  the  occasion  of  many  disputes  both  on  general  prin- 
ciple and  in  particular  causes.  These  disputes,  notwithstanding 
the  legislative  activity  of  the  kings  and  the  general  good  under- 
standing which  subsisted  between  them  and  the  prelates,  were  not 
during  the  Middle  Ages  authoritatively  and  finally  decided.  It 
is  enough  for  our  present  purpose  to  state  generally  the  tendency 
to  draw  all  causes  which  in  any  way  concerned  landed  property 
into  the  royal  courts,  and  to  prevent  all  attempts  at  a  rival  juris- 
diction. .  .  . 

In  criminal  suits  the  position  of  the  clergy  was  more  defensible. 
The  secular  courts  were  bound  to  assist  the  spiritual  courts  in 
obtaining  redress  and  vindication  for  clergymen  who  were  injured 
by  laymen;  in  cases  in  which  the  clerk  himself  was  accused,  the 
clerical  immunity  from  trial  by  the  secular  judge  was  freely  recog- 
nized. If  the  ordinary  claimed  the  incriminated  clerk,  the  secular 
court  surrendered  him  for  ecclesiastical  trial :  the  accused  might 
claim  the  benefit  of  clergy  either  before  trial  or  after  conviction 
in  the  lay  court ;  and  it  was  not  until  the  fifteenth  century  that  any 
very  definite  regulation  of  this  dangerous  immunity  was  arrived 
at.  We  have  seen  the  importance  which  the  jurisdiction  over 
criminous  clerks  assumed  in  the  first  quarrel  between  Becket  and 
Henry  II.  It  was  with  the  utmost  reluctance  that  the  clergy 
admitted  the  decision  of  the  legate  Hugo  Pierleoni,  that  the  king 
might  arrest  and  punish  clerical  offenders  against  the  forest  law. 

The  ordinary,  moved  by  a  sense  of  justice  or  by  a  natural  dis- 
like to  acknowledge  the  clerical  character  of  a  criminal,  would  not 
probably,  except  in  times  of  political- excitement,  interfere  to  save 
the  convicted  clerk ;  and  in  many  cases  the  process  of  retributive 
justice  was  too  rapid  to  allow  of  his  interposition.  It  is  not  a  little 
curious,  however,  to  find  that  Henry  IV,  at  the  time  of  his  closest 
alliance  with  Arundel,  did  not  hesitate  to  threaten  archbishops  and 
bishops  with  condign  punishment  for  treason ;  that  on  one  famous 
occasion  he  carried  the  threat  into  execution ;  and  that  the  hanging 
of  the  mendicant  friars,  who  spread  treason  in  the  earlier  years  of 
his  reign,  was  a  summary  proceeding  which  would  have  endangered 
the  throne  of  a  weak  king  even  in  less  tumultuous  times. 


21 8  English  Historians 

Into  the  legal  minutiae  of  these  points  we  are  not  called  on  to 
enter:  as  to  their  social  and  constitutional  bearing,  it  is  enough  to 
remark  that,  although,  in  times  when  class  jealousies  are  strong, 
clerical  immunities  are  in  theory,  but  in  theory  only,  a  safeguard 
of  society,  their  uniform  tendency  is  to  keep  alive  the  class  jeal- 
ousies; they  are  among  the  remedies  which  perpetuate  the  evils 
which  they  imperfectly  counteract.  In  quiet  times  such  immuni- 
ties are  unnecessary;  in  unquiet  times  they  are  disregarded. 

Of  the  temporal  causes  which  were  subject  to  the  cognizance  of 
ecclesiastical  courts  the  chief  were  matrimonial  and  testamentary 
suits,  and  actions  for  the  recovery  of  ecclesiastical  payments, 
tithes,  and  customary  fees.  The  whole  jurisdiction  in  questions 
of  marriage  was,  owing  to  the  sacramental  character  ascribed  to 
the  ordinance  of  matrimony,  throughout  Christendom  a  spiritual 
jurisdiction.  The  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  in  testamentary  mat- 
ters and  the  administration  of  the  goods  of  persons  dying  intes- 
tate, was  peculiar  to  England  and  the  sister  kingdoms,  and  had  its 
origin,  it  would  appear,  in  times  soon  after  the  Conquest.  In 
Anglo-Saxon  times  there  seems  to  have  been  no  distinct  recognition 
of  the  ecclesiastical  character  of  these  causes,  and  even  if  there  had 
been  they  would  have  been  tried  in  the  shire-moot.  Probate  of 
wills  is  also  in  many  cases  a  privilege  of  manorial  courts,  which 
have  nothing  ecclesiastical  in  their  composition,  and  represent  the 
more  ancient  moots  in  which  no  doubt  the  wills  of  the  Anglo-Saxons 
were  published.  As  however  the  testamentary  jurisdiction  was 
regarded  by  Glanville  as  an  undisputed  right  of  the  church  courts, 
the  date  of  its  commencement  cannot  be  put  later  than  the  reign 
of  Henry  I,  and  it  may  possibly  be  as  old  as  the  separation  of  lay 
and  spiritual  courts.  The  "subtraction  of  tithe"  and  refusal  to 
pay  ecclesiastical  fees  and  perquisites  were  likewise  punished  by 
spiritual  censures  which  the  secular  power  undertook  to  enforce. 

As  all  these  departments  closely  bordered  upon  the  domain  of  the 
temporal  courts,  some  concert  between  the  two  was  indispensable; 
and  there  were  many  points  on  which  the  certificate  of  the  spiritual 
court  was  the  only  evidence  on  which  the  temporal  court  could  act ; 
in  questions  of  legitimacy,  regularity  of  marriage,  the  full  posses- 
sion of  holy  orders,  and  the  fact  of  institution  to  livings,  the  assist- 
ance of  the  spiritual  court  enabled  the  temporal  courts  to  complete 
their  proceedings  in  suits  touching  the  title  to  property,  dower,  and 
patronage ;  and  the  more  ambitious  prelates  of  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury claimed  the  last  two  departments  for  the  spiritual  courts.  In 
this,  however,  they  did  not  obtain  any  support  from  Rome,  and  at 


The  Church  in  the  Middle  Ages  219 

home  the  claim  was  disregarded.  Besides  these  chief  points, 
there  were  other  minor  suits  for  wrongs  for  which  the  temporal 
courts  afforded  no  remedy,  such  as  slander  in  cases  where  the 
evil  report  did  not  cause  material  loss  to  the  person  slandered : 
these  belonged  to  the  spiritual  courts  and  were  punished  by 
spiritual  penalties. 

Besides  the  jurisdiction  in  these  matters  of  temporal  concern, 
there  was  a  large  field  of  work  for  the  church  courts  in  disciplinary 
cases:  the  cognizance  of  immorality  of  different  kinds,  the  cor- 
rection of  which  had  as  its  avowed  purpose  the  benefit  of  the  soul 
of  the  delinquent.  In  these  trials  the  courts  had  their  own  methods 
of  process  derived  in  great  measure  from  the  Roman  law,  with  a 
whole  apparatus  of  citations,  libels,  and  witnesses,  the  process 
of  purgation,  penance,  and,  in  default  of  proper  satisfaction,  ex- 
communication and  its  resulting  penalties  enforced  by  the  tem- 
poral law.  The  sentence  of  excommunication  was  the  ultimate 
resource  of  the  spiritual  courts.  If  the  delinquent  held  out  for 
forty  days  after  the  denunciation  of  this  sentence,  the  king's  court, 
by  writ  of  significavit  or  some  similar  injunction,  ordered  the  sheriff 
to  imprison  him  until  he  satisfied  the  claims  of  the  Church. 

These  proceedings  furnished  employment  for  a  great  machinery 
of  judicature;  the  archbishops  in  their  prerogative  courts,  the 
bishops  in  their  consistories,  the  archdeacons  in  some  cases,  and 
even  the  spiritual  judges  of  still  smaller  districts,  exercised  juris- 
diction in  all  these  matters ;  in  some  points,  as  in  probate  and 
administration,  coordinately,  in  others  by  way  of  delegation  or  of 
review  and  appeal.  .  .  . 

The  jurisdiction  of  the  spiritual  courts  over  spiritual  men  em- 
braced all  matters  concerning  the  canonical  and  moral  conduct 
of  the  clergy :  faith,  practice,  fulfilment  of  ecclesiastical  obligations, 
and  obedience  to  ecclesiastical  superiors.  For  these  questions  the 
courts  possessed  a  complete  jurisprudence  of  their  own,  regular 
processes  of  trial,  and  prisons  in  which  the  convicted  offender  was 
kept  until  he  had  satisfied  the  justice  of  the  Church.  In  these 
prisons  the  clerk,  convicted  of  a  crime  for  which  if  he  had  been  a 
layman  he  would  have  suffered  death,  endured  lifelong  captivity; 
here  the  clerk  convicted  of  a  treason  or  felony  in  the  secular  court, 
and  subsequently  handed  over  to  the  ordinary,  was  kept  in  safe 
custody. 

In  1402,  when  Henry  IV  confirmed  the  liberties  of  the  clergy, 
the  archbishop  undertook  that  no  clerk  convicted  of  treason,  or 
being  a  common  thief,  should  be  admitted  to  purgation,  and  that 


220  English  Historians 

this  should  be  secured  by  a  constitution  to  be  made  by  the  bish- 
ops. These  prisons,  especially  after  the  alarms  consequent  on 
the  Lollard  movements,  were  a  grievance  in  the  eyes  of  the  laity, 
who  do  not  seem  to  have  trusted  the  good  faith  of  the  prelates  in 
their  treatment  of  delinquent  clergy.  The  promise  of  Archbishop 
Arundel  was  not  fulfilled. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Gneist,  History  of  the  English  Constitution,  chap,  xxvi:  Capes,  History 
of  the  English  Church  in  the  Fourteenth  and  Fifteenth  Centuries.  Robinson, 
Readings  in  European  History,  Vol.  I,  chap.  xvi.  For  documents,  see 
Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents  Illustrative  of  English  Church  History. 


CHAPTER   V 

JOHN  WYCLIFFE  AND   THE   CHURCH 

THOUGH  there  were  many  critics  of  the  abuses  in  the  Church 
during  the  Middle  Ages,  John  Wycliffe  differed  from  them  in  being 
revolutionary  in  matters  of  religious  doctrine.  He  has  long  been 
regarded  as  the  precursor  of  the  Reformation  in  England ;  but  it 
now  seems  tolerably  certain  that  his  doctrines  found  no  considerable 
acceptance  among  the  people  of  England  at  the  opening  of  the 
sixteenth  century.  Indeed,  the  thoroughness  with  which  his  influ- 
ence was  checked  is  remarkable,  especially  when  his  widespread 
activities,  the  volume  of  his  writings,  and  the  determination  of  his 
followers  are  taken  into  consideration.  It  constitutes  an  interesting 
psychological  problem  just  why  this  was  so,  in  view  of  the  develop- 
ments a  century  and  a  half  later.  Great  light  will  be  thrown  upon 
this  problem  by  studying  the  conditions  of  the  continental  Church 
which  for  a  time  furthered  his  revolt,  and  also  the  causes  for  the 
strength  of  the  Church  in  England  at  the  close  of  the  fourteenth 
century. 

§  i .    Outline  of  Wycliffe1 s  Life  i 

Wycliffe  was  of  North  English  parentage,  and  was  born  about 
1 3^20  in  the  Richmond  district  of  Yorkshire.  He  was  sent  to  Ox- 
ford, but  when  and  how  is  unknown;  the  attractions  of  an  intel- 
lectual life  kept  him  at  the  University,  where  he  passed  through 
many  grades  and  offices,  and  took  his  share  both  in  the  teaching 
and  administration  of  the  place.  He  was  once  Master  of  Balliol ; 
he  was  perhaps  Warden  of  Canterbury  Hall.  His  reputation  as  a 
theologian  increased  gradually,  but  until  he  was  some  fifty  years 
of  age  it  was  an  Oxford  reputation  only.  It  is  impossible  to  say 

1  Trevelyan,  England  in  the  Age  oj  Wycliffe,  pp.  169  ff.  By  permission 
of  G.  M.  Trevelyan,  Esq.,  and  Messrs.  Longmans,  Green  &  Companv 
Publishers. 


222  English  Historians 

whether  he  resided  all  the  year  round,  or  all  years  together,  at 
the  University.  From  1363  onwards  he  held  livings  in  the  country, 
though  never  more  than  one  at  a  time. 

In  1374  he  finally  received  from  the  crown  the  rectory  of  Lut- 
terworth,  with  which  his  name  is  forever  connected.  There  he 
lived  continuously  after  his  expulsion  from  Oxford  in  1382;  there 
he  wrote  his  later  works  and  collected  his  friends  and  mission- 
aries. The  Leicestershire  village  became  the  centre  of  a  religious 
movement.  Owing  to  the  difficulty  of  ascertaining  the  exact 
dates  of  his  different  books  and  pamphlets,  it  would  be  hard  to 
distinguish  between  those  of  his  theories  which  issued  from  Oxford 
and  those  which  first  appeared  at  Lutterworth.  There  is  no  need 
in  a  general  history  of  the  times  to  attempt  the  difficult  task  of 
exact  chronological  division,  such  as  would  be  necessary  in  a 
biography  of  Wycliffe.  It  is  enough  to  know  that  his  demand 
for  disendowment  preceded  his  purely  doctrinal  heresies;  that 
his  quarrel  with  the  friars  came  to  a  head  just  before  his  denial 
of  transubstantiation  in  1380,  while  his  attack  on  the  whole  organi- 
zation and  the  most  prominent  doctrines  of  the  mediaeval  Church 
is  found  in  its  fulness  only  in  his  later  works. 

§  2.    Scholasticism  and  Wyclifte's  Mental  Attitude 

The  method  by  which  he  arrived  at  his  conclusions  was  in  ap- 
pearance the  scholastic  method  then  recognized.  Without  such  a 
basis  his  theories  would  have  been  treated  with  ridicule  by  all 
theologians,  and  he  would  have  been  as  much  out  of  place  at  Ox- 
ford as  Voltaire  in  the  Sorbonne.  The  system  of  argument,  which 
makes  his  Latin  writings  unreadable  in  the  nineteenth  century, 
made  them  formidable  in  the  fourteenth.  And  yet,  essentially, 
he  was  not  an  academician.  Instinct  and  feeling  were  the  true 
guides  of  his  mind,  not  the  close  reasoning  by  which  he  conceived 
that  he  was  irresistibly  led  to  inevitable  conclusions.  The  doc- 
trines of  Protestantism,  and  the  conception  of  a  new  relation 
between  Church  and  State,  were  not  really  the  deductions  of  any 
cut-and-dried  dialectic.  The  one  important  inclination  that  he 
derived  from  scholasticism  was  the  tendency,  shared  with  all 
mediaeval  thinkers,  to  carry  his  theories  to  their  furthest  logical 
point.  Hence  he  was  rather  a  radical  than  a  moderate  reformer. 
This  uncompromising  attitude  of  mind  assigned  to  him  his  true 
function. 

He  was  not  the  leader  of  a  political  party  trying  to  carry  through 


John  Wycliffe  and  the  Church  223 

the  modicum  of  reform  practical  at  the  moment;  but  a  private 
individual  trying  to  spread  new  ideas  and  to  begin  a  movement 
of  thought  which  should  bear  fruit  in  ages  to  come.  His  later 
writings  show  that  he  had  ceased  to  regard  himself  as  a  "serious 
politician  " ;  perhaps  he  was  dimly  aware  that  he  was  something 
greater.  He  did  well,  both  for  himself  and  the  world,  to  throw 
aside  all  hopes  of  immediate  success  and  speak  out  the  truth  that 
was  in  him  without  counting  the  cost.  But  his  greatest  admirers 
must  admit  that  in  some  cases  his  logic  drove  him  to  give  unwise 
and  impossible  advice.  Some  will  think  his  recommendation  of 
complete  disendowment  and  the  voluntary  system  to  be  little  better, 
and  all  will  probably  agree  that  his  proposal  to  include  the  uni- 
versities in  this  scheme  was  unnecessary.  But  as  they  were  then 
part  of  the  Church,  he  did  not  see  how  it  was  consistent  with  his 
logic  that  they  should  continue  to  hold  endowments  of  land  and 
appropriated  tithes. 

§  3.    Development  of  Wycliffe1  s  Doctrines 

In  the  same  way,  he  carried  to  an  equally  extravagant  length  his 
theory  that  the  life  of  the  priest  should  be  purely  spiritual.  To 
spiritualize  the  occupations  of  the  clergy  was  a  very  desirable  reform 
at  this  time,  but  there  was  no  need  that  Wycliffe  should  therefore 
wish  to  restrict  their  studies  to  theology.  His  objection  to  the 
attendance  of  clergy  at  lectures  on  law  and  physical  science  was, 
beyond  doubt,  a  step  in  the  wrong  direction.  He  was  confirmed 
in  this  error  by  his  belief  in  the  all-sufficiency  of  the  Bible.  "This 
lore  that  Christ  taught  us  is  enough  for  this  life,"  he  says,  "and 
other  lore,  and  more,  over  this,  would  Christ  that  were  suspended." 
Learned  as  he  was  himself,  he  affected  to  depreciate  earthly  learn- 
ing. But  while  such  extravagances  detract  somewhat  from  his 
greatness,  as  they  certainly  detracted  from  his  usefulness,  they 
cannot  be  held,  as  his  enemies  hold  them,  to  be  the  principal  part 
of  his  legacy  to  mankind.  True  genius  nearly  always  pays  the 
price  of  originality  and  inventive  power,  in  mistakes  proportion- 
ately great. 

In  his  political  ideas  regarding  the  Church,  Wycliffe  was  one 
of  a  school.  Continental  and  English  writers  had  already  for  a 
century  been  theorizing  against  the  secular  power  of  ecclesiastics. 
The  Papal  Bull  of  1377  had  likened  Wycliffe's  early  heresies  to  the 
"perverse  opinions  and  unlearned  learning  of  Marsiglio  of  Padua 
of  damned  memory,"  who  had  demanded  that  the  Church  should 


224  English  Historians 

be  confined  to  her  spiritual  province,  and  had  attacked  the 
"Caesarean  clergy." 

Wycliffe  himself  recognized  Occam  as  his  master,  for  his  great 
fellow-countryman  had  more  than  fifty  years  back  declared  it  the 
duty  of  priests  to  live  in  poverty,  and  had  maintained  with  his 
pen  the  power  of  the  secular  State  against  the  pope.  It  was  by 
the  spiritual  Franciscans,  "those  evangelical  men,"  as  Wycliffe 
called  them,  "very  dear  to  God,"  that  the  poverty  ordered  by  the 
Gospel  had  been  chiefly  practised  and  preached  as  an  example 
for  the  whole  Church. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  was  to  their  enemy  Fitz  Ralph,  Bishop  of 
Armagh,  that  he  owed  his  doctrine  of  "dominion."  Grosset£te, 
the  reforming  bishop  of  Lincoln,  had  in  his  day  attacked  pluralities 
and  opposed  the  abuses  of  papal  power  in  England.  Wycliffe  not 
only  spoke  of  him  with  respect  and  admiration,  but  again  and 
again  quoted  his  words  and  advanced  his  opinions  as  authoritative. 
But  while  these  predecessors  had  dealt  with  one  or  two  points  only, 
Wycliffe  dealt  with  religion  as  a  whole.  Besides  the  political 
proposals  of  Occam  and  Marsiglio,  he  sketched  out  a  new  religion 
which  included  their  proposed  changes  as  part  only  of  the  new 
ideas  respecting  the  relations  of  man  to  God. 

In  this  field  of  doctrine  and  religion  he  was  himself  the  originator 
of  a  school.  His  authorities,  his  teachers,  were  not  the  thinkers 
of  his  own  century,  but  the  fathers  of  the  early  Church.  Few, 
perhaps,  of  his  ideas  were  new  in  the  sense  that  they  had  never 
before  been  conceived  by  man.  But  many  were  absolutely  new 
to  his  age.  In  those  days  there  was  no  scientific  knowledge  of  the 
past,  and  mere  tradition  can  be  soon  altered. 

If  the  Catholic  faith  of  the  tenth  century  had  been  modified, 
no  one  in  the  fourteenth  would  have  known  that  any  such  change 
had  taken  place.  Even  the  memory  of  the  Albigenses  and  their 
terrible  fate  seems  to  have  vanished,  or  to  have  survived  only  as 
a  tale  that  is  told.  They  are  not  mentioned  in  Wycliffe's 
writings.  He  did  not  borrow  his  heresies  from  them,  as  the 
Hussites  borrowed  from  him.  Wycliffe's  restatements,  if  such 
they  were,  were  therefore  to  all  intents  and  purposes  discov- 
eries. The  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  had  not  always  been 
held  by  the  Church,  but  it  had  been  held  for  many  generations 
when  it  was  denied  by  Wycliffe.  His  declaration  that  his  own 
view  had  been  the  orthodox  faith  for  "the  thousand  years  that 
Satan  was  bound,"  was  of  little  meaning  to  the  unlearned  and 
unimaginative. 


John  Wycliffe  and  the  Church  225 


§  4.    The  Doctrine  o-f  Transubstantiation 

He  developed  this  famous  heresy  in  1379  and  1380,  during  the 
latter  part  of  his  residence  at  Oxford.  He  had  previously  believed 
in  the  great  miracle,  but  was  led  into  his  new  position,  he  declares, 
by  the  metaphysical  consideration  of  the  impossibility  of  accidents 
existing  without  substance.  This  may  well  be  true ;  the  terms  are 
a  philosophical  way  of  stating  the  plain  man's  difficulties.  But 
there  were  many  other  considerations  besides  metaphysical  argu- 
ments which  influenced  his  judgment.  Transubstantiation  was 
unsuited  to  the  general  character  of  his  mind,  which  always  found 
difficulty  in  attributing  very  high  sacredness  to  particles  of  matter. 
Thus  he  complained  that  the  orthodox  view  of  the  Eucharist  was 
a  cause  of  idolatry,  that  the  people  made  the  host  their  God. 

Ever  since  his  day  the  question  has  been  the  shibboleth  dividing 
off  those  who  revolt  against  materialized  objects  of  reverence  and 
worship  from  those  to  whom  the  materialization  gives  no  offence. 
Neither  was  Wycliffe  blind  to  the  use  made  of  the  theory  of  tran- 
substantiation  by  the  priests,  and  still  more  by  the  friars,  to  secure 
the  veneration  and  obedience  of  those  to  whom  they  ministered. 
He  declared  that  nothing  was  more  horrible  to  him  than  the  idea 
that  every  celebrating  priest  made  the  body  of  Christ ;  the  mass 
was  a  false  miracle  invented  for  mundane  purposes.  It  is  now 
acknowledged  that  the  power  of  the  clergy  is  strongest  with  those 
peoples  who  believe  in  transubstantiation.  Even  in  the  fourteenth 
century  the  Church  recognized  that  her  position  depended  on  the 
doctrine. 

Whether  Wycliffe  knew  what  a  storm  he  was  about  to  raise,  it  is 
impossible  to  say.  At  any  rate,  the  storm  arose  at  once,  and  he 
never  for  an  instant  shrank  from  its  fury.  John  of  Gaunt  hurried 
down  in  person  to  Oxford,  and  ordered  him  to  be  silent  on  the 
question.  Such  vigorous  action  shows  not  only  what  importance 
the  duke  attached  to  his  ally,  but  the  alarm  with  which  he  regarded 
heresy  about  the  mass.  The  way  was  now  divided  before  Wycliffe, 
and  he  had  to  make  his  choice.  By  a  sacrifice  of  principle  he 
would  have  become  the  bond-slave  of  a  discredited  political  party, 
but  he  would  have  remained  at  Oxford  safe  from  all  annoyance  by 
the  Church,  under  the  patronage  and  occasionally  in  the  employ- 
ment of  the  State ;  by  doing  the  duty  which  lay  before  him  with- 
out consideration  of  consequence,  he  sacrificed  the  Lancastrian 
alliance,  he  threw  away  the  protection  of  the  government,  he  put 
Q 


226  English  Historians 

himself  at  the  mercy  of  the  bishops,  he  was  driven  from  Oxford ; 
he  ceased  to  have  an  honored  position  in  high  circles,  to  be  spoken 
of  with  respect  by  great  friends  and  recognition  by  great  enemies. 

The  hopes  and  schemes  of  the  last  ten  years  vanished.  By  his 
refusal  to  obey  the  duke  he  entered  finally  on  the  new  life  into 
which  he  had  been  gradually  drifting  for  some  time  past, — the  life 
of  the  enthusiast  who  builds  for  the  future  and  not  for  the  present, 
with  the  arm  of  the  spirit  and  not  with  the  arm  of  the  flesh.  Such 
a  choice  was  not  so  hard  for  Wycliffe  as  it  has  often  proved  for 
others.  He  was  no  sensitive  Erasmus.  Proud  and  ascetic,  he 
had  ever  despised  the  things  of  this  world.  A  man  of  war  from 
his  youth  up,  the  truth  was  always  more  to  him  than  peace.  He 
refused  to  be  silent  on  the  dangerous  subject,  and  John  of^Gaunt 
retired  from  Oxford  baffled.  It  would  be  interesting  to  knowwKat 
thoughts  were  uppermost  in  the  duke's  mind  as  he  rode  out  of  the 
town  after  this  memorable  interview. 

Although,  in  arguing  against  the  orthodox  view  of  the  Real 
Presence,  Wycliffe  put  forward  forcibly,  and  even  crudely,  the 
evidences  of  the  senses,  and  laid  stress  on  the  absurdity  of  a  useless 
miracle  performed  many  times  a  day,  often  by  the  lowest  type  of 
priest,  he  never  went  farther  in  his  depreciation  of  the  sacrament 
than  the  position  generally  known  as  consubstantiation.  The 
Eucharist  always  presented  to  him  a  mystery.  He  believed  the 
body  was  in  some  manner  present,  though  how  he  did  not  clearly 
know;  he  was  only  certain  that  bread  was  present  also. 

• 

§  5.    Wycliffe  and  Other  Ecclesiastical  Doctrines  and  Practices 

With  regard  to  the  other  sacraments,  Wycliffe  depreciated  the 
importance  then  attached  to  them,  though  he  made  an  exception 
in  favor  of  matrimony.  He  himself  did  not  propose  to  reduce 
their  number,  although  the  change  effected  by  the  Protestants  of  a 
later  age  was  in  perfect  accord  with  his  principles.  It  is  unneces- 
sary again  to  point  out  how  very  different  was  his  view  of  penance, 
extreme  unction,  and  holy  orders  from  that  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  We  find,  in  Waldensis's  confutation  of  Lollardry  that, 
as  we  should  suppose  from  a  perusal  of  Wycliffe's  own  works,  the 
distinguishing  feature  of  the  sect  was  a  depreciation  of  the  miracu- 
lous power  of  the  church  sacraments,  and  the  peculiar  saving 
qualities  of  ceremonies,  prayers,  and  pardons.  Wycliffe  pointed 
out  that  there  was  another  road  to  salvation,  —  a  godly  life.  He 
thought  the  religious  world  had  been  led  astray,  and  in  pursuit  of 


John  Wycliffe  and  the  Church  227 

formulas  was  forgetting  the  essence  of  Christianity.  The  direct  rela- 
tion of  the  individual  to  God  without  these  interventions  was  the 
positive  result  of  his  negative  criticism.  This  idea  seems  to  form 
the  basis  of  all  his  objections  and  of  all  his  scepticism.  This  was 
the  centre  of  a  rather  unsystematized  crowd  of  thoughts  which  he 
threw  out  on  the  world,  which  have  sometimes  been  regarded  as 
detached  and  chaotic. 

The  same  principle  appears  in  his  attitude  towards  church 
services.  The  degree  to  which  a  rite  increased  the  real  devotion  of 
the  people  was,  he  declared,  the  test  of  its  propriety.  He  found 
that  intoning  and  elaborate  singing  took  the  mind  off  the  meaning 
of  the  prayer.  He  quoted  St.  Augustine's  dictum  "as  oft  as  the 
song  delighteth  me  more  than  that  is  songen,  so  oft  I  acknowl- 
edge I  trespass  grievously."  This  became  a  favorite  text  with 
his  followers.  By  the  same  standard,  he  judged  that  the  splendid 
building  and  gaudy  decoration  of  churches  drew  away  the  minds 
of  the  worshippers.  In  that  age,  whatever  deterioration  there  might 
be  in  other  spheres  of  ecclesiastical  activity,  the  unbroken  but 
progressive  tradition  of  Gothic  architecture  still  continued  to  fill 
the  country  with  achievements  as  noble  as  any  that  the  art  of  man 
has  accomplished.  The  simple  magnificence  of  the  Early  English 
style  was  being  gradually  modified,  so  as  to  exhibit  larger  quantities 
of  delicate  tracery.  At  the  same  time  the  church  services,  in  the 
hands  of  armies  of  choristers  and  chantry  priests,  were  being 
adorned  by  music  more  difficult  and  by  intoning  more  elaborate 
than  the  old  Gregorian  chants. 

But  what  were  these  new  beauties  to  the  class  of  men  who  find 
no  reality  of  worship  under  such  forms,  and  who  require  some- 
thing altogether  different  by  way  of  religion  ?  To  their  needs  and 
thoughts  Wycliffe  gave  expression  in  language  which,  compared  to 
his  language  on  some  other  subjects,  is  extremely  moderate.  But 
his  demand  was  distinct,  and  it  was  founded  on  a  want  deeply 
felt  by  many  of  his  countrymen.  We  are  not  surprised  to  find  that 
the  Lollards  in  the  next  generation  found  no  comfort  in  the  ser- 
vices of  the  Church,  and  for  lack  of  conventicles  "met  in  caves  and 
woods."  A  distinctive  character  was  thus  given  to  the  worship 
of  the  new  English  heretics ;  it  was  a  worship  essentially  Protestant, 
and  did  not  depend  for  its  performance  on  priest  or  Church. 

Although  we  have  no  account  of  the  meetings  of  these  first  non- 
conformists, their  character  can  be  gathered  from  the  writings 
of  Wycliffe  and  his  followers,  who  again  and  again  insist  on  the 
greater  importance  of  preaching  and  the  smaller  importance  of 


228  English   Historians 

ceremonies.  Preaching,  they  declared,  was  the  first  duty  of  clergy- 
men, and  of  more  benefit  to  the  laity  than  any  sacrament.  The 
sermon  was  the  special  weapon  of  the  early  reformers ;  it  was  the 
distinguishing  mark  of  Wycliffe's  poor  priests.  Their  chief  rivals 
in  this  art,  as  in  everything  else,  were  the  friars,  of  whose  sermons 
there  were  always  enough  and  to  spare.  But  Wycliffe  accused  the 
friars  of  preaching  to  amuse  men  and  to  win  their  money,  making 
up  for  want  of  real  earnestness  by  telling  stories  more  popular 
than  edifying.  He  wanted  an  entirely  different  class  of  preacher, 
one  who  should  call  people  to  repentance,  and  make  the  sermon 
the  great  instrument  for  reformation  of  life  and  manners.  To 
Wycliffe  preaching  seemed  the  most  effectual  means  by  which  to 
arouse  men  to  a  sense  of  their  personal  relation  to  God,  and  of  the 
consequent  importance  of  their  every  action.  Absolution,  masses, 
pardons,  and  penance  commuted  for  money  were  so  many  ways  of 
keeping  all  real  feeling  of  responsibility  out  of  the  mind.  "To 
preach  to  edifying"  became  the  care  of  the  Lollards,  in  the  place 
of  ceremonies  and  rituals.  .  .  . 

He  regarded  the  Virgin  Mary  in  a  spirit  halfway  between  the 
Mariolatry  of  his  contemporaries  and  the  fierce  anger  with  which 
Knox  threw  her  image  into  the  waters  as  a  "painted  bred."  He 
has  left  us  an  interesting  treatise  entitled  Ave  Maria,  in  which 
he  holds  up  her  life  as  an  example  to  all,  and  especially  to  women, 
in  language  full  of  sympathy  and  beauty.  But  he  does  not  advise 
people  to  pray  to  her.  He  does  not  speak  either  in  praise  or  con- 
demnation of  the  images  of  the  Virgin,  which  then  looked  down 
from  every  church  in  the  land. 

Although  he  did  not  generally  indulge  in  tirades  against  idolatry, 
he  mentions  the  mistaken  worship  of  images  as  part  of  other  super- 
stitious practices  attaching  to  the  popular  cultus  of  saints ;  he  puts 
it  on  the  same  footing  as  the  foolish  adoration  of  relics,  the  costly 
decoration  of  shrines,  and  other  ways  in  which  pilgrims  wasted 
their  time  and  money.  Wycliffe  was  not  the  first  or  only  man  of  his 
time  in  England  to  be  shocked  by  these  practices.  Langland, 
whose  Piers  Plowman  was  generally  read  among  all  classes  ten 
or  twenty  years  before  the  rise  of  Lollardry,  had  in  that  great 
work  spoken  even  more  severely  of  the  popular  religion,  and  used 
the  word  idolatry  more  freely  than  Wycliffe.  Chaucer's  gorge 
rose  at  the  Pardoner  and  his  relics  of  "pigge's  bones."  The  im- 
pulse that  Wycliffe  gave  was  therefore  welcome  to  many,  and  was 
eagerly  followed  by  the  Lollards,  who  soon  became  more  distinctly 
iconoclastic  than  their  founder,  and  regarded  saints,  saints'  days, 


John   Wycliffe  and  the  Church  229 

and  saint-worship  with  a  horror  which  he  never  expressed.  But 
his  other  doctrines  of  the  relation  of  man  to  God  and  of  man  to  the 
Church,  his  new  ideas  of  pardon  and  absolution,  were  the  only 
effective  engine  for  the  destruction  of  those  abuses  and  vulgarities 
which  Langland  and  Chaucer  vainly  deprecated. 

Against  the  persons  and  classes  who  lived  by  encouraging 
superstition,  Wycliffe  waged  implacable  war.  He  recognized  that 
as  long  as  the  orders  of  friars  existed  in  England  it  would  always  be 
hard  to  fight  against  the  practices  and  beliefs  which  they  taught. 
His  views  on  monks  and  on  bishops,  respectively,  were  much  the 
same.  His  objections  to  them  all  were  founded  on  the  belief 
that  they  were  the  real  props  of  all  he  sought  to  destroy,  the  sworn 
enemies  of  all  he  sought  to  introduce.  After  his  quarrel  with  the 
friars,  he  put  these  thoughts  into  a  definite  formula.  All  men,  he 
declared,  belonged,  or  ought  to  belong,  to  the  "sect  of  Christ,"  and 
to  that  alone.  The  distinguishing  mark  of  the  members  was  the 
practice  of  Christian  virtues  in  ordinary  life,  whether  by  priest 
or  layman.  The  body  had  therefore  its  rule,  the  Christian  code  of 
morality.  He  found,  he  said,  no  warrant  in  Scripture  to  justify 
any  man  in  binding  himself  by  another  code  of  religious  rules,  or 
becoming  a  member  of  any  new  sect.  Yet  that,  he  said,  was  what 
the  monks  and  friars  had  done.  They  claimed  to  be  "the  reli- 
gious," more  dear  to  God  than  other  men.  But  their  rule  was  of 
earthly  making,  the  work  of  Benedict,  or  Francis,  not  of  Christ; 
there  was  really  only  one  rule  of  life,  and  that  was  binding  on  all 
Christians  equally.  Religion  did  not  consist  in  peculiar  rites  dis- 
tinguishing some  men  from  others.  Wycliffe  affected  also  to 
regard  the  worldly  prelates  and  clergy,  who  held  secular  office  and 
secular  property,  as  another  "sect."  The  pretensions  and  self- 
interest  of  the  Church,  and  the  intense  party  spirit  actuating  the 
authorities,  gave  a  certain  meaning  to  the  word.  A  powerful  and 
jealous  organization,  dangerous  to  the  State  as  well  as  fatal  to 
individual  freedom  of  religious  practice,  was  very  far  from  that 
idea  of  the  Church  which  Wycliffe  thought  he  found  in  the  histories 
of  the  early  Christian  community.  .  .  . 

The  pope  had  no  place  in  Wycliffe's  free  Church  of  all  Christian 
men.  "If  thou  say  that  Christ's  Church  must  have  a  head  here  on 
earth,  sooth  it  is,  for  Christ  is  head,  that  must  be  here  with  his 
Church  until  the  day  of  doom."  This  complete  repudiation  of 
papal  authority  was  the  last  stage  of  a  long  process.  Until  the 
time  of  the  schism  he  had  done  no  more  than  state  the  fallibility 
of  the  pope,  and  expose  papal  deviations  from  the  "law  of  God." 


230  English   Historians 

When  in  1378  his  enemy  and  persecutor  .Gregory  the  Eleventh 
died,  he  welcomed  .the  accession  of  Urban  the  Sixth,  and  hoped  to 
see  in  him  a  reforming  head  of  Christendom.  He  was  soon  dis- 
appointed. The  anti-pope  Clement  was  set  up  at  Avignon,  and 
gods  and  men  were  edified  by  the  spectacle  of  the  two  successors 
of  St.  Peter  issuing  excommunications  and  raising  armies  against 
each  other.  Then,  and  not  till  then,  Wycliffe  denied  all  papal 
power  over  the  Church. 

The  positive  basis  which  Wycliffe  set  up,  in  place  of  absolute 
church  authority,  was  the  Bible.  We  find  exactly  the  same  de- 
votion to  the  literal  text  in  Wycliffe  and  his  followers  as  among 
the  later  Puritans.  He  even  declared  that  it  was  our  only  ground 
for  belief  in  Christ.  Without  this  positive  basis,  the  struggle  against 
Romanism  could  never  have  met  with  the  partial  success  that  event- 
ually attended  it. 

As  for  a  new  scheme  of  church  government,  Wycliffe  cannot  be 
said  to  have  put  one  forward.  He  pleaded  for  greater  simplicity 
of  organization,  greater  freedom  of  the  individual,  and  less  crush- 
ing authority.  As  his  object  was  to  free  those  laymen  and  parsons 
who  were  of  his  way  of  thinking  from  the  control  of  the  pope  and 
bishops,  he  proposed  to  abolish  the  existing  forms  of  church  gov- 
ernment. But  he  never  devised  any  other  machinery,  such  as  a 
presbytery,  to  take  their  place.  The  time  had  not  come  for  definite 
schemes,  such  as  were  possible  and  necessary  in  the  days  of  Luther, 
Calvin,  and  Cranmer,  for  success  was  not  even  distantly  in  sight. 
The  position  of  the  Lollards  was  anomalous,  standing  half  inside 
and  half  outside  the  Church. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Loserth,  The  Beginnings  of  Wyclifs  Activity  in  Ecclesiastical  Politics 
in  the  English  Historical  Review,  1896,  pp.  319  ff.  Lechler,  Life  of  John 
Wyclif.  Capes,  History  of  the  English  Church  in  the  Fourteenth  and 
Fifteenth  Centuries.  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents  Illustrative  of  English 
Church  History. 


PART   IV 

THE   TUDOR  AGE 

CHAPTER  I 

THE  NEW  LEARNING — ERASMUS  AND  MORE 

THE  development  of  Tudor  absolutism  after  the  battle  of 
Bosworth  helped  to  direct  into  peaceful  channels  the  forces 
which  had  been  wasted  and  checked  by  feudal  and  dynastic 
conflicts.  The  rapid  expansion  of  ocean  trade  gave  the  requi- 
site opportunities  for  the  numerical  increase  of  the  trading  and 
industrial  classes,  and  the  correlated  classes  such  as  the  lawyers. 
The  introduction  of  the  printing-press  stimulated  intellectual  ac- 
tivity which  quickly  widened  the  range  of  man's  interests  and 
speculations.  This  general  European  awakening  was  represented 
in  England  by  many  distinguished  men,  among  whom  Colet,  More, 
Grocyn,  and  Linacre  stand  out  most  prominently.  With  this 
group  is  often  associated  Erasmus  who,  though  born  at  Rotter- 
dam, was  cosmopolitan  by  nature  and  spent  some  time  in  England. 
Several  of  these  men  of  letters  while  loyal  to  the  authority  of  the 
Church  Universal  were  keenly  alive  to  many  existing  abuses  in 
Church  and  State,  and  in  two  famous  works,  the  Praise  of  Folly 
and  the  Utopia,  Erasmus  and  Mcore  gave  free  swing  to  the  spirit 
of  criticism.  Of  these  two  books,  Seebohm,  in  his  Oxford  Re- 
formers, gives  an  entertaining  account. 

§  i.    Erasmus  Writes  the  "Praise  of  Folly"  While  Resting 
at  More's  House  (1510  or  1511) * 

To  beguile  his  time,  Erasmus  took  pen  and  paper,  and  began  to 

1  Seebohm,  The  Oxford  Reformers,  3d  edition,  pp.  192  ff.  and  346  ff.  By 
permission  of  Frederick  Seebohm,  Esq.,  and  Messrs.  Longmans,  Green,  & 
Company,  Publishers. 

231 


232  English  Historians 

write  down  at  his  leisure  the  satirical  reflections  on  men  and  things 
which,  as  already  mentioned,  had  grown  up  within  him  during  his 
recent  travels,  and  served  to  beguile  the  tedium  of  his  journey 
from  Italy  to  England.  It  was  not  done  with  any  grave  design 
or  any  view  of  publication;  but  he  knew  his  friend  More  was 
fond  of  a  joke,  and  he  wanted  something  to  do  to  take  his  atten- 
tion from  the  weariness  of  the  pain  which  he  was  suffering.  So 
he  worked  away  at  his  manuscript.  One  day  when  More  came 
home  from  business,  bringing  a  friend  or  two  with  him,  Erasmus 
brought  it  out  for  their  amusement.  The  fun  would  be  so  much 
the  greater,  he  thought,  when  shared  by  several  together.  He  had 
fancied  Folly  putting  on  her  cap  and  bells,  mounting  her  rostrum, 
and  delivering  an  address  to  her  votaries  on  the  affairs  of  man- 
kind. These  few  select  friends  having  heard  wtiat  he  had  al- 
ready written,  were  so  delighted  with  it  that  they  insisted  on 
its  being  completed.  In  about  a  week  the  whole  was  finished. 
This  is  the  simple  history  of  the  Praise  of  Folly. 

§  2.   Grammarians  and  the  Scholastic  System 

It  was  a  satire  upon  follies  of  all  kinds.  The  bookworm  was 
smiled  at  for  his  lantern  jaws  and  sickly  look ;  the  sportsman  for 
his  love  of  butchery;  the  superstitious  were  sneered  at  for  at- 
tributing strange  virtues  to  images  and  shrines,  for  worshipping 
another  Hercules  under  the  name  of  St.  George,  for  going  on  pil- 
grimage when  their  proper  duty  was  at  home.  The  wickedness 
of  fictitious  pardons  and  the  sale  of  indulgences,  the  folly  of  prayers 
tojthe  Virgin  in  shipwreck  or  distress,  received  each  a  passing 
censure. 

Grammarians  were  singled  out  of  the  regiment  of  fools  as  the 
most  servile  votaries  of  folly.  They  were  described  as  "a  race  of 
men  the  most  miserable,  who  grow  old  in  penury  and  filth  in  their 
schools — schools,  did  I  say?  prisons!  dungeons!  I  should  have 
said  —  among  their  boys,  deafened  with  din,  poisoned  by  a  fetid 
atmosphere,  but,  thanks  to  their  folly,  perfectly  self-satisfied, 
so  long  as  they  can  bawl  and  shout  to  their  terrified  boys,  and  box 
and  beat  and  flog  them,  and  so  indulge  in  all  kinds  of  ways  their 
cruel  disposition." 

After  criticising  with  less  severity  poets  and  authors,  rhetoricians 
and  lawyers,  Folly  proceeded  to  reecho  the  censure  of  Colet  upon 
the  dogmatic  system  of  the  Schoolmen. 

She  ridiculed  the  logical  subtlety  which  spent  itself  on  splitting 


The  New  Learning  —  Erasmus  and  More     233 

hairs  and  disputing  about  nothing,  and  to  which  the  modern  fol- 
lowers of  the  Schoolmen  were  so  painfully  addicted.  She  ridi- 
culed, too,  the  prevalent  dogmatic  philosophy  and  science,  which 
having  been  embraced  by  the  Schoolmen  and  sanctioned  by  ec- 
clesiastical authority,  had  become  a  part  of  the  scholastic 
system.  "With  what  ease  do  they  dream  and  prate  of  the  crea- 
tion of  innumerable  worlds;  measuring  sun,  moon,  stars,  and 
earth  as  though  by  a  thumb  and  thread ;  rendering  a  reason  for 
thunder,  wind,  eclipse,  and  other  inexplicable  things;  never  hesi- 
tating in  the  least,  just  as  though  they  had  been  admitted  into 
the  secrets  of  creation,  or  as  though  they  had  come  down  to  us  from 
the  council  of  the  Gods  —  with  whom,  and  whose  conjectures, 
Nature  is  mightily  amused ! " 

§  3.  Scholastic  Theology  and  Foolish  Questions 

From  dogmatic  science  Folly  turned  at  once  to  dogmatic  the- 
ology, and  proceeded  to  comment  in  her  severest  fashion  on  a  class 
whom,  she  observes,  it  might  have  been  safest  to  pass  over  in 
silence  —  divines.  "Their  pride  and  irritability  are  such  (she 
said)  that  they  will  come  down  upon  me  with  their  six  hundred  con- 
clusions, and  compel  me  to  recant;  and,  if  I  refuse,  declare  me  a 
heretic  forthwith.  .  .  .  They  explain  to  their  own  satisfaction  the 
most  hidden  mysteries:  how  the  universe  was  constructed  and 
arranged  —  through,  what  channels  the  stain  of  original  sin  de- 
scends to  posterity  —  how  the  miraculous  birth  of  Christ  was 
effected  —  how  in  the  Eucharist  wafer  the  accidents  can  exist 
without  a  substance,  and  so  forth.  And  they  think  themselves 
equal  to  the  solution  of  such  questions  as  these :  Whether  .  .  . 
God  could  have  taken  upon  himself  the  nature  of  a  woman,  a  devil, 
an  ass,  a  gourd,  or  a  stone?  And  how  in  that  case  a  gourd  could 
have  preached,  worked  miracles,  and  been  nailed  to  the  cross? 
What  Peter  would  have  consecrated  if  he  had  consecrated  the 
Eucharist  at  the  moment  that  the  body  of  Christ  was  hanging  upon 
the  Cross  ?  Whether  at  that  moment  Christ  could  have  been  called 
a  man?  Whether  we  shall  eat  and  drink  after  the  resurrection?" 
In  a  later  edition,  Folly  is  made  to  say  further:  "These  School- 
men possess  such  learning  and  subtlety  that  I  fancy  even  the 
Apostles  themselves  would  need  another  Spirit,  if  they  had  to 
engage  with  this  new  race  of  divines  about  questions  of  this 
kind."  .  .  . 

After  pursuing  the  subject  further,  Folly  suggests  that  an  army 


234  English  Historians 

of  them  should  be  sent  against  the  Turks,  not  in  the  hope  that  the 
Turks  might  be  converted  by  them  so  much  as  that  Christendom 
would  be  relieved  by  their  absence,  and  then  she  is  made  quietly 
to  say:  "You  may  think  all  this  is  said  in  joke,  but  seriously, 
there  are  some,  even  amongst  divines  themselves,  versed  in  better 
learning,  who  are  disgusted  at  these  (as  they  think)  frivolous  subtle- 
ties of  divines.  There  are  some  who  execrate,  as  a  kind  of  sacri- 
lege, and  consider  as  the  greatest  impiety  these  attempts  to  dispute 
with  unhallowed  lips  and  profane  arguments  about  things  so  holy 
that  they  should  rather  be  adored  than  explained,  to  define  them 
with  so  much  presumption,  and  to  pollute  the  majesty  of  divine 
theology  with  cold,  yea  and  sordid,  words  'and  thoughts.  But, 
in  spite  of  these,  with  the  greatest  self-complacency  divines  go  on 
spending  night  and  day  over  their  foolish  studies,  so  that  they  never 
have  any  leisure  left  for  the  perusal  of  the  gospels,  or  the  epistles 
of  St.  Paul." 

Finally,  Folly  exclaims,  "Are  they  not  the  most  happy  of  men 
whilst  they  are  treating  of  these  things?  whilst  describing  every- 
thing in  the  infernal  regions  as  exactly  as  though  they  had  lived 
there  for  years  ?  whilst  creating  new  spheres  at  pleasure,  one,  the 
largest  and  most  beautiful,  being  finally  added,  that,  forsooth, 
happy  spirits  might  have  room  enough  to  take  a  walk,  to  spread 
their  feasts,  or  to  play  at  ball  ?  "  .  .  . 

Monks  came  in  fpr  at  least  as  rough  a  handling.  There  is 
perhaps  no  more  severe  and  powerful  passage  anywhere  in  the 
whole  book  than  that  in  which  Folly  is  made  to  draw  a  picture  of 
their  appearance  on  the  Judgment  Day,  finding  themselves  with 
the  goats  on  the  left  hand  of  the  Judge,  pleading  hard  their  rigor- 
ous observance  of  the  rules  and  ceremonies  of  their  respective 
orders,  but  interrupted  by  the  solemn  question  from  the  Judge: 
"Whence  this  race  of  new  Jews?  I  know  only  of  one  law  which  is 
really  mine;  but  of  that  I  hear  nothing  at  all.  When  on  earth, 
without  mystery  or  parable,  I  openly  promised  my  Father's  in- 
heritance, not  to  cowls,  matins,  or  fastings,  but  to  the  practice 
of  faith  and  charity.  I  know  you  not,  ye  who  know  nothing 
but  your  own  works.  Let  those  who  wish  to  be  thought  more  holy 
than  I  am  inhabit  their  newly  discovered  heavens;  and  let  those 
who  prefer  their  own  traditions  to  my  precepts,  order  new  ones  to 
be  built  for  them."  When  they  shall  hear  this  (continues  Folly), 
"and  see  sailors  and  wagoners  preferred  to  themselves,  how  do 
you  think  they  will  look  upon  each  other  ?  " 


The  New  Learning  —  Erasmus  and  More     235 


§  4.  Folly  on  Kings,  Princes,  and  the  Pope 

Kings,  princes,  and  courtiers  next  pass  under  review,  and  here 
again  may  be  traced  that  firm  attitude  of  resistance  to  royal  tyr- 
anny which  has  already  been  marked  in  the  conduct  of  More. 
If  More  in  his  congratulatory  verses  took  the  opportunity  of  pub- 
licly asserting  his  love  of  freedom  and  hatred  of  tyranny  in  the  ears 
of  the  new  king,  his  own  personal  friend,  as  he  mounted  the  throne, 
so  Erasmus  also,  although  come  back  to  England  full  of  hope  that 
in  Henry  VIII  he  might  find  a  patron,  not  only  of  learning  in  gen- 
eral but  of  himself  in  particular,  took  this  opportunity  of  putting 
into  the  mouth  of  Folly  a  similar  assertion  of  the  sacred  rights  of 
the  people  and  the  duties  of  a  king:  — 

"It  is  the  duty  (she  suggests)  of  a  true  prince  to  seek  the  public 
and  not  his  own  private  advantage.  From  the  laws,  of  which  he 
is  both  the  author  and  executive  magistrate,  he  must  not  himself 
deviate  by  a  finger's  breadth.  He  is  responsible  for  the  integrity 
of  his  officials  and  magistrates.  .  .  .  But  (continues  Folly)  by  my 
aid  princes  cast  such  cares  as  these  to  the  winds,  and  care  only  for 
their  own  pleasure.  .  .  .  They  think  they  fill  their  position  well 
if  they  hunt  with  diligence,  if  they  keep  good  horses,  if  they  make 
gain  to  themselves  by  the  sale  of  offices  and  places,  if  they  can  daily 
devise  new  means  of  undermining  the  wealth  of  citizens,  and  raking 
it  into  their  own  exchequer,  disguising  the  iniquity  of  such  pro- 
ceedings by  some  specious  pretence  and  show  of  legality." 

If  the  memory  of  Henry  VII  was  fresh  in  the  minds  of  More  and 
Erasmus,  so  also  his  courtiers  and  tools,  of  whom  Empson  and 
Dudley  were  the  recognized  types,  were  not  forgotten.  The  cring- 
ing, servile,  abject,  and  luxurious  habits  of  courtiers  were  fair 
game  for  Folly. 

From  this  cutting  review  of  kings,  princes,  and  courtiers,  the 
satire,  taking  a  still  bolder  flight,  at  length  swooped  down  to  fix 
its  talons  in  the  very  flesh  of  the  pope  himself. 

The  Oxford  friends  had  some  personal  knowledge  of  Rome  and 
her  pontiffs.  When  Colet  was  in  Italy,  the  notoriously  wicked 
Alexander  VI  was  pope,  and  what  Colet  thought  of  him  has  been 
mentioned.  While  Erasmus  was  in  Italy,  Julius  II  was  pope. 
He  had  succeeded  to  the  papal  chair  in  1503. 

Julius  II,  in  the  words  of  Ranke,  "devoted  himself  to  the  grati- 
fication of  that  innate  love  of  war  and  conquest  which  was  in- 
deed the  ruling  passion  of  his  life.  ...  It  was  the  ambition  of 


236  English  Historians 

Julius  II  to  extend  the  dominions  of  the  Church.  He  must  there- 
fore be  regarded  as  the  founder  of  the  Papal  States."  Erasmus,  dur- 
ing his  recent  visit,  had  himself  been  driven  from  Bologna  when  it 
was  besieged  by  the  Roman  army,  led  by  Julius  in  person.  He  had 
written  from  Italy  that  "literature  was  giving  place  to  war,  that 
Pope  Julius  was  warring,  conquering,  triumphing,  and  openly  act- 
ing the  Caesar."  Mark  how  aptly  and  boldly  he  now  hit  off  his 
character  in  strict  accordance  with  the  verdict  of  history,  when  in 
the  course  of  his  satire  he  came  to  speak  of  popes.  Folly  dryly 
observes  that,  "Although  in  the  gospel  Peter  is  said  to  have  de- 
clared, 'Lo,  we  have  left  all,  and  followed  thee,'  yet  these  popes 
speak  of  'St.  Peter's  patrimony'  as  consisting  of  lands,  towns, 
tributes,  customs,  lordships;  for  which,  when  their  zeal  for 
Christ  is  stirred,  they  fight  with  fire  and  sword  at  the  expense  of 
much  Christian  blood,  thinking  that  in  doing  so  they  are  apostolic 
defenders  of  Christ's  spouse,  the  Church,  from  her  enemies.  As 
though,  indeed,  there  were  any  enemies  of  the  Church  more  per- 
nicious than  impious  popes!  .  .  .  Further,  as  the  Christian 
Church  was  founded  in  blood,  and  confirmed  by  blood,  and  ad- 
vanced by  blood,  now  in  like  manner,  as  though  Christ  were  dead 
and  could  no  longer  defend  his  own,  they  take  to  the  sword.  And 
although  war  be  a  thing  so  savage  that  it  becomes  wild  beasts  rather 
than  men,  so  frantic  that  the  poets  feigned  it  to  be  the  work  of  the 
Furies,  so  pestilent  that  it  blights  at  once  all  morality,  so  unjust 
that  it  can  be  best  waged  by  the  worst  of  ruffians,  so  impious  that 
it  has  nothing  in  common  with  Christ,  yet  to  the  neglect  of  every- 
thing else  they  devote  themselves  to  war  alone." 

And  this  bold  satire  upon  the  warlike  passions  of  the  pope  was 
made  still  more  direct  and  personal  by  what  followed.  To  quote 
Ranke  once  more:  "Old  as  Julius  now  was,  worn  by  the  many 
vicissitudes  of  good  and  evil  fortune,  and  most  of  all  by  the  conse- 
quences of  intemperance  and  licentious  excess,  in  the  extremity 
of  age  he  still  retained  an  indomitable  spirit.  It  was  from  the 
tumults  of  a  general  war  that  he  hoped  to  gain  his  objects.  He 
desired  to  be  the  lord  and  master  of  the  game  of  the  world.  In 
furtherance  of  his  grand  aim  he  engaged  in  the  boldest  operations, 
risking  all  to  obtain  all."  Compare  with  this  picture  of  the  old  age 
of  the  warlike  pope  the  following  words  put  by  Erasmus  into  the 
mouth  of  Folly,  and  printed  and  read  all  over  Europe  in  the  life- 
time of  Julius  himself:  — 

"Thus  you  may  see  even  decrepit  old  men  display  all  the  vigor 
of  youth,  sparing  no  cost,  shrinking  from  no  toil,  stopped  by 


The  New   Learning  —  Erasmus  and   More     237 

nothing,  if  only  they  can  turn  law,  religion,  peace,  and  all  human 
affairs  upside  down." 

In  conclusion,  Folly,  after  pushing  her  satire  in  other  directions, 
was  made  to  apologize  for  the  bold  flight  she  had  taken.  If  any- 
thing she  had  said  seemed  to  be  spoken  with  too  much  loquacity 
or  petulance,  she  begged  that  it  might  be  remembered  that  it  was 
spoken  by  Folly.  But  let  it  be  remembered  also,  she  added,  that  — 

A  fool  oft  speaks  a  seasonable  truth. 

She  then  made  her  bow,  and  descended  the  steps  of  her  rostrum, 
bidding  her  most  illustrious  votaries  farewell,  —  valele,  plaudite, 
vivite,  bibite! 

Such  was  the  Praise  of  Folly,  the  manuscript  of  which  was 
snatched  from  Erasmus  by  More  or  one  of  his  friends  and  ulti- 
mately sent  over  to  Paris  to  be  printed  there,  probably  in  the  sum- 
mer of  1511,  and  to  pass  within  a  few  months  through  no  less  than 
seven  editions. 

§  5.   Preparation  0}  the  "  Utopia"  (1515) 

It  was  whilst  More's  keen  eye  was  anxiously  watching  the  clouds 
gathering  upon  the  political  horizon,  and  during  the  leisure  hours 
snatched  from  the  business  of  his  embassy,  that  he  conceived  the 
idea  of  embodying  his  notions  on  social  and  political  questions 
in  a  description  of  the  imaginary  commonwealth  of  the  Island  of 
"Utopia"  —  "Nusquama"--  or  "Nowhere." 

It  does  not  often  happen  that  two  friends,  engaged  in  fellow- 
work,  publish  in  the  same  year  two  books,  both  of  which  take  an 
independent  and  permanent  place  in  the  literature  of  Europe.  But 
this  may  be  said  of  the  Novum  Instrumentum  of  Erasmus  and  the 
Utopia  of  More. 

Still  more  remarkable  is  it  that  two  such  works,  written  by  two 
such  men,  should,  in  a  measure,  be  traceable  to  the  influence  and 
express  the  views  of  a  more  obscure  but  greater  man  than  they. 
Yet,  in  truth,  much  of  the  merit  of  both  these  works  belongs  indi- 
rectly toJColet. 

As  the  Novum  Instrumentum  upon  careful  examination  proves 
to  be  the  expression,  on  the  part  of  Erasmus,  not  merely  of  his  own 
isolated  views,  but  of  the  views  held  in  common  by  the  little  band 
of  Oxford  Reformers,  on  the  great  subject  of  which  it  treats, 
so  the  Utopia  will  be  found  to  be  in  great  measure  the  expression, 
on  More's  part,  of  the  views  of  the  same  little  band  of  friends  on 


238  English  Historians 

social  and  political  questions.  On  most  of  these  questions  Erasmus 
and  More,  in  the  main,  thought  alike ;  and  they  owed  much  of  their 
common  convictions  indirectly  to  the  influence  of  Colet. 

The  first  book  of  the  Utopia  was  written  after  the  second,  under 
circumstances  and  for  reasons  which  will,  in  due  course,  be  men- 
tioned. 

The  second  book  was  complete  in  itself  and  contained  the  de- 
scription, by  Raphael,  the  supposed  traveller,  of  the  Utopian  com- 
monwealth. Erasmus  informs  us  that  More's  intention  in  writing 
it  was  to  point  out  where  and  from  what  causes  European  com- 
monwealths were  at  fault,  and  he  adds  that  it  was  written  with 
special  reference  to  English  politics,  with  which  More  was  most 
familiar. 

Whilst,  however,  we  trace  its  close  connection  with  the  political 
events  passing  at  the  time  in  England,  it  must  not  be  supposed  that 
More  was  so  gifted  with  prescience  that  he  knew  what  course 
matters  would  take.  He  could  not  know,  for  instance,  that  Wol- 
sey  was  about  to  take  the  reins  of  government  so  completely  into 
his  own  hands  as  to  dispense  with  a  Parliament  for  so  many  years 
to  come.  As  yet,  More  and  his  friends,  in  spite  of  Wolsey's  ostpn- 
tatipn  and  vanity,  which  they  freely  ridiculed,  had  a  high  opinion  of 
his  cfiaracter  and  powers.  It  was  not  unnatural  that,  knowing 
that  Wolsey  was  a  friend  to  education,  and,  to  some  extent  at  least, 
inclined  to  patronize  the  projects  of  Erasmus,  they  should  hope  for 
the  best.  Hence  the  satire  contained  in  Utopia  was  not  likely  to 
be  directed  personally  against  Wolsey,  however  much  his  policy 
might  come  in  for  its  share  of  criticisms  along  with  the  rest. 

The  point  of  the  Utopia  consisted  in  the  contrast  presented  by 
its  ideal  commonwealth  to  the  condition  and  habits  of  the  European 
commonwealths  of  the  period.  This  contrast  is  most  often  left  to 
be  drawn  by  the  reader  from  his  own  knowledge  of  contemporary 
politics,  and  hence  the  peculiar  advantage  of  the  choice  by  More 
of  such  a  vehicle  for  the  bold  satire  it  contained.  Upon  any  other 
hypothesis  than  that  the  evils  against  which  its  satire  was  directed 
were  admitted  to  be  real,  the  romance  of  Utopia  must  also  be  ad- 
mitted to  be  harmless.  To  pronounce  it  to  be  dangerous,  was  to 
admit  its  truth. 

§  6.    International  Policy  of  the  Utopians 

Take,  e.g.,  the  following  passage  relating  to  the  international 
policy  of  the  Utopians :  — 

"While  other  nations  are  always  entering  into  leagues,  and  break- 


The  New  Learning  —  Erasmus  and  More     239 

ing  and  renewing  them,  the  Utopians  never  enter  into  a  league  with^ 
any  nation.  For  what  is  the  use  of  a  league  ?  they  say.  As  though' 
there  were  no  natural  tie  between  man  and  man !  and  as  though 
any  one  who  despised  this  natural  tie  would,  forsooth,  regard  mere 
words !  They  hold  this  opinion  all  the  more  strongly,  because  in 
that  quarter  of  the  world  the  leagues  and  treaties  of  princes  are  not 
observed  as  faithfully  as  they  should  be.  For  in  Europe,  and  espe- 
cially in  those  parts  of  it  where  the  Christian  faith  and  religion 
are  professed,  the  sanctity  of  leagues  is  held  sacred  and  inviolate; 
partly  owing  to  the  justice  and  goodness  of  princes,  and  partly 
from  their  fear  and  reverence  of  the  authority  of  the  popes,  who, 
as  they  themselves  never  enter  into  obligations  which  they  do  not 
most  religiously  perform  [ !],  command  other  princes  under  all 
circumstances  to  abide  by  their  promises,  and  punish  delinquents 
by  pastoral  censure  and  discipline.  For,  indeed,  with  good  reason, 
it  would  be  thought  a  most  scandalous  thing  for  those  whose  pecul- 
iar designation  is  '  the  faithful,'  to  be  wanting  in  the  faithful  ob- . 
servance  of  treaties.  But  in  those  distant  regions  ...  no  faith  is 
to  be  placed  in  leagues,  even  though  confirmed  by  the  most  solemn 
ceremonies.  Some  flaw  is  easily  found  in  their  wording  which  is 
intentionally  made  ambiguous  so  as  to  leave*  a  loophole  through 
which  the  parties  may  break  both  their  league  and  their  faith. 
Which  craft  —  yes,  fraud  and  deceit  —  if  it  were  perpetrated  with 
respect  to  a  contract  between  private  parties,  they  would  indig- 
nantly denounce  as  sacrilege  and  deserving  the  gallows,  whilst 
those  who  suggest  these  very  things  to  princes,  glory  in  being  the 
authors  of  them.  Whence  it  comes  to  pass  that  justice  seems  alto- 
gether a  plebeian  and  vulgar  virtue,  quite  below  the  dignity  of 
royalty ;  or  at  least  there  must  be  two  kinds  of  it,  the  one  for  com- 
mon people  and  the  poor,  very  narrow  and  contracted ;  the  other, 
the  virtue  of  princes,  much  more  dignified  and  free,  so  that  that 
only  is  unlawful  to  them  which  they  don't  like.  The  morals  of 
princes  being  such  in  that  region,  it  is  not,  I  think,  without  reason 
that  the  Utopians  enter  into  no  leagues  at  all.  Perhaps  they 
would  alter  their  opinion  if  they  lived  amongst  us." 

Read  without  reference  to  the  international  history  of  the  period 
these  passages  appear  perfectly  harmless.  But  read  in  the  light 
of  that  political  history  which,  during  the  past  few  years,  had 
become  so  mixed  up  with  the  personal  history  of  the  Oxford 
Reformers,  recollecting  "  how  religiously"  treaties  had  been  made 
and  broken  by  almost  every  sovereign  in  Europe,  —  Henry  VIII 
and  the  pope  included, — the  words  in  which  the  justice  and 


240  English  Historians 

goodness  of  European  princes  are  so  mildly  and  modestly  extolled 
become  almost  as  bitter  in  their  tone  as  the  cutting  censure  of 
Erasmus  in  the  Praise  0}  Folly,  or  his  more  recent  and  open 
satire  upon  kings. 

Again,  bearing  in  mind  the  wars  of  Henry  VIII,  and  how  evi- 
dently the  love  of  military  glory  was  the  motive  which  induced  him 
to  engage  in  them,  the  following  passage  contains  almost  as  direct 
and  pointed  a  censure  of  the  king's  passion  for  war  as  the  sermon 
preached  by  Colet  in  his  presence:  — 

"The  Utopians  hate  war  as  plainly  brutal,  although  practised 
more  eagerly  by  man  than  by  any  other  animal.  And  contrary 
to  the  sentiment  of  nearly  every  other  nation,  they  regard  nothing 
more  inglorious  than  glory  derived  from  war." 

§  7.   Government  a  Conspiracy  of  the  Rich  against  the  Poor 

.  Turning  from  international  politics  to  questions  of  internal  pol- 
icy, and  hearing  in  mind  the  hint  of  Erasmus,  that  More  had  in 
view  chiefly  The  politics  of  his  own  country,  it  is  impossible  not  to 
recognize  in  the  Utopia  the  expression  again  and  again  of  the 
sense  of  wrong  stirred  up  in  More's  heart  as  he  had  witnessed 
how  every  interest  of  the  commonwealth  had  been  sacrificed  to 
Henry  VIII's  passion  for  war;  and  how,  in  sharing  the  burdens  it 
entailed,  and  dealing  with  the  social  evils  it  brought  to  the  surface, 
the  interests  of  the  poor  had  been  sacrificed  to  spare  the  pockets 
of  the  rich ;  how,  whilst  the  very  wages  of  the  laborer  had  been 
taxed  to  support  the  long-continued  war  expenditure,  a  selfish 
Parliament,  under  color  of  the  old  "statutes  of  laborers,"  had  at- 
tempted to  cut  down  the  amount  of  his  wages,  and  to  rob  him  of 
that  fair  rise  in  the  price  of  his  labor  which  the  drain  upon  the 
labor  market  had  produced. 

It  is  impossible  not  to  recognize  that  the  recent  statutes  of  la- 
borers were  the  target  against  which  More's  satire  was  specially 
directed  in  the  following  paragraph:  — 

"Let  any  one  dare  to  compare  with  the  even  justice  which  rules 
in  Utopia,  the  justice  of  other  nations ;  amongst  whom  let  me  die, 
if  I  find  any  trace  at  all  of  equity  and  justice.  For  where  is  the 
justice,  that  noblemen,  goldsmiths,  and  usurers,  and  those  classes 
who  either  do  nothing  at  all,  or,  in  whatever  they  do,  are  of  no  great 
service  to  the  commonwealth,  should  live  a  genteel  and  splendid 
life  in  idleness  or  unproductive  labor,  whilst  in  the  meantime  the 
servant,  the  wagoner,  the  mechanic,  and  the  peasant,  toiling  almost 


The  New  Learning  —  Erasmus  and   More     241 

longer  and  harder  than  the  horse,  in  labor  so  necessary  that  no  com- 
monwealth could  endure  a  year  without  it,  lead  a  life  so  wretched 
that  the  condition  of  the  horse  seems  more  to  be  envied,  his  labor 
being  less  constant,  his  food  more  delicious  to  his  palate,  and  his 
mind  disturbed  by  no  fears  for  the  future  ?  .  .  . 

"Is  not  that  republic  unjust  and  ungrateful  which  confers  such 
benefits  upon  the  gentry  (as  they  are  called)  and  goldsmiths  and 
others  of  that  class,  whilst  it  cares  to  do  nothing  at  all  for  the  benefit 
of  peasants,  colliers,  wagoners,  servants,  and  mechanics,  without 
which  no  republic  could  exist?  Is  not  that  republic  unjust  which, 
after  these  men  have  spent  the  springtime  of  their  lives  in  labor, 
have  become  burdened  with  age  and  disease,  and  are  in  want 
of  every  comfort,  unmindful  of  all  their  toil,  and  forgetful  of  all 
their  services,  rewards  them  only  by  a  miserable  death  ? 

"Worse  than  all,  the  rich  constantly  endeavor  to  pare  away  some- 
thing further  from  the  daily  wages  of  the  poor,  by  private  fraud, 
and  even  by  public  laws,  so  that  the  already  existing  injustice  (that 
those  from  whom  the  republic  derives  the  most  bene^iiwshould  re- 
ceive the  least  reward)  is  made  still  more  unjust  through  the  enact- 
ments of  public  law  !  Thus,  after  careful  reflection,  it  seems  to  me, 
as  I  hope  for  mercy,  that  our  modern  republics  are  nothing  but  a 
conspiracy  of  the  rich,  pursuing  their  own  selfish  interests  under 
the  name  of  a  republic.  They  devise  and  invent  all  ways  and 
means  whereby  they  may,  in  the  first  place,  secure  to  themselves 
the  possession  of  what  they  have  amassed  by  evil  means;  and,  in 
the  second  place,  secure  to  their  own  use  and  profit  the  work  and 
labor  of  the  poor  at  the  lowest  possible  price.  And  so  soon  as  the 
rich,  in  the  name  of  the  public  (i.e.  even  in  the  name  of  the  poor), 
choose  to  decide  that  these  schemes  shall  be  adopted,  then  they 
become  law!" 

The  whole  framework  of  the  Utopian  commonwealth  bears 
witness  to  More's  conviction,  that  what  should  be  aimed  at  in  his 
own  country  and  elsewhere,  was  a  true  community,  not  a  rich 
and  educated  aristocracy  on  the  one  hand,  existing  side  by  side  with 
a  poor  and  ignorant  peasantry  on  the  other,  but  one  people, 
well-to-do  and  educated  throughout. 

Thus  More's  opinion  was,  that  in  England  in  his  time,  "far 
more  than  four  parts  of  the  whole  people,  divided  into  ten,  could 
never  read  English,"  and  probably  the  education  of  the  other  six- 
tenths  was  anything  but  satisfactory.  He  shared  Colet's  faith  in 
education,  and  represented  that  in  Utopia  every  child  was  properly 
educated. 


242  English  Historians 

Again  the  great  object  of  the  social  economy  of  Utopia  was  not 
to  increase  the  abundance  of  luxuries,  or  to  amass  a  vast  accumula- 
tion in  few  hands,  or  even  in  national  or  royal  hands,  but  to  lessen 
the  hours  of  labor  to  the  workingman.  By  spreading  the  burden 
of  labor  more  evenly  over  the  whole  community,  —  by  taking  care 
that  there  should  be  no  idle  classes,  be  they  beggars  or  begging 
friars,  —  More  expressed  the  opinion  that  the  hours  of  labor  to 
the  workingman  might  probably  be  reduced  to  six. l 

Again :  living  himself  in  Bucklersbury,  in  the  midst  of  all  the 
dirt  and  filth  of  London's  narrow  streets;  surrounded  by  the  un- 
clean, ill-ventilated  houses  of  the  poor,  whose  floors  of  clay  and 
rushes,  never  cleansed,  were  pointed  out  by  Erasmus  as  breeding 
pestilence  and  inviting  the  ravages  of  the  sweating  sickness ;  him- 
self a  commissioner  of  sewers,  and  having  thus  some  practical 
knowledge  of  London's  sanitary  arrangements,  More  described 
the  towns  of  Utopia  as  well  and  regularly  built,  with  wide  streets, 
waterworks,  hospitals,  and  numerous  common  halls ;  all  the  houses 
well  protected  from  the  weather,  as  nearly  as  might  be  fireproof, 
three  stories  high,  with  plenty  of  windows,  and  doors  both  front  and 
back,  the  back  door  always  opening  into  a  well-kept  garden.  All 
this  was  Utopian,  doubtless,  and  the  result  in  Utopia  of  the 
still  more  Utopian  abolition  of  private  property ;  but  the  gist  and 
the  point  of  it  consisted  in  the  contrast  it  presented  with  what  he 
saw  around  him  in  Europe,  and  especially  in  England,  and  men 
could  hardly  fail  to  draw  the  lesson  he  intended  to  teach. 

It  will  not  be  necessary  here  to  dwell  further  upon  the  details 
of  the  social  arrangements  of  More's  ideal  commonwealth,  or  to 
enter  at  length  upon  the  philosophical  opinions  of  the  Utopians ; 
but  a  word  or  two  will  be  needful  to  point  out  the  connection  of  the 
latter  with  the  views  of  that  little  band  of  friends  whose  joint  his- 
tory I  am  here  trying  to  trace. 

§  8.   The  Religion  of  Utopia  Broad  and  Tolerant 

From  his  expression  of  a  fearless  faith  in  the  consistency  of 
Christianity  with  science,  it  might  be  inferred  that  More  would 
represent  the  religion  of  the  Utopians  as  at  once  broad  and  tolerant. 
It  could  not  logically  be  otherwise.  The  Utopians,  we  are  told, 
differed  very  widely ;  but  notwithstanding  all  their  different  objects 
of  worship,  they  agreed  in  thinking  that  there  is  one  Supreme  Being 
who  made  and  governs  the  world.  By  the  exigencies  of  the  ro- 
mance, the  Christian  religion  had  only  been  recently  introduced  into 


The  New  Learning  —  Erasmus  and   More     243 

the  island.  It  existed  there  side  by  side  with  other  and  older  reli- 
gions, and  hence  the  difficulties  of  complete  toleration  in  Utopia 
were  much  greater  hypothetically  than  they  would  be  in  any  Euro- 
pean country.  Still,  sharing  Colet's  hatred  of  persecution,  More 
represented  that  it  was  one  of  the  oldest  laws  of  Utopia  "that  no 
man  is  to  be  punished  for  his  religion."  Every  one  might  be  of 
any  religion  he  pleased,  and  might  use  argument  to  induce  others 
to  accept  it.  It  was  only  when  men  resorted  to  other  force  than  that 
of  persuasion,  using  reproaches  and  violence,  that  they  were  ban- 
ished from  Utopia ;  and  then,  not  on  account  of  their  religion,  and 
irrespective  of  whether  their  religion  were  true  or  false,  but  for 
sowing  sedition  and  creating  a  tumult. 

This  law  Utopus  founded  to  preserve  the  public  peace,  and  for 
the  interests  of  religion  itself.  Supposing  only  one  religion  to  be 
true  and  the  rest  false  (which  he  dare  not  rashly  assert),  Utopus 
had  faith  that  in  the  long  run  the  innate  force  of  truth  would  pre- 
vail, if  supported  only  by  fair  argument,  and  not  damaged  by  resort 
to  violence  and  tumult.  Thus,  he  did  not  punish  even  avowed 
atheists,  although  he  considered  them  unfit  for  any  public  trust. 

Their  priests  were  very  few  in  number  of  either  sex,  and,  like 
all  their  other  magistrates,  elected  by  ballot  (suffragiis  occullis) ; 
and  it  was  a  point  of  dispute  even  with  the  Utopian  Christians, 
whether  they  could  not  elect  their  own  Christian  priests  in  like 
manner,  and  qualify  them  to  perform  all  priestly  offices,  without 
any  apostolic  succession  or  authority  from  the  pope.  Their  priests 
were,  in  fact,  rather  conductors  of  the  public  worship,  inspectors 
of  the  public  morals,  and  ministers  of  education  than  "priests" 
in  any  sacerdotal  sense  of  the  word.  Thus  whilst  representing 
confession  as  in  common  use  amongst  Utopians,  More  significantly 
described  them  as  confessing  not  to  the  priests  but  to  the  heads  of 
families.  Whilst  also,  as  in  Europe,  such  was  the  respect  shown 
them  that  they  were  not  amenable  to  the  civil  tribunals,  it  was  said 
to  be  on  account  of  the  extreme  fewness  of  their  number,  and  the 
high  character  secured  by  their  mode  of  election,  that  no  great  in- 
convenience resulted  from  this  exemption  in  Utopian  practice. 

If  the  diversity  of  religions  in  Utopia  made  it  more  difficult 
to  suppose  perfect  toleration,  and  thus  made  the  contrast  between 
Utopian  and  European  practice  in  this  respect  all  the  more  telling, 
so  also  was  this  the  case  in  respect  to  the  conduct  of  public  worship. 

The  hatred  of  the  Oxford  Reformers  for  the  endless  dissensions 
of  European  Christians ;  the  advice  Colet  was  wont  to  give  to  theo- 
logical students,  "to  keep  to  the  Bible  and  the  Apostles'  Creed, 


244  English   Historians 

and  let  divines,  if  they  like,  dispute  about  the  rest " ;  the  appeal  of 
Erasmus  to  Servatius,  whether  it  would  not  be  better  for  "all 
Christendom  to  be  regarded  as  one  monastery,  and  all  Christians 
as  belonging  to  the  same  religious  brotherhood,"  -—  all  pointed,  if 
directed  to  the  practical  question  of  public  worship,  to  a  mode  of 
worship  in  which  all  of  every  shade  of  sentiment  could  unite. 

This  might  be  a  dream  even  then,  while  as  yet  Christendom 
was  nominally  united  in  one  Catholic  Church ;  and  still  more  prac- 
tically impossible  in  a  country  like  Utopia,  where  men  wor- 
shipped the  Supreme  Being  under  different  symbols  and  different 
names,  as  it  might  be  now  even  in  a  Protestant  country  like  Eng- 
land, where  religion  seems  to  be  the  source  of  social  divisions  and 
castes  rather  than  a  tie  of  brotherhood,  separating  men  in  their 
education,  in  their  social  life,  and  even  in  their  graves,  by  the  hard 
line  of  sectarian  difference.  It  might  be  a  dream,  but  it  was  one 
worth  a  place  in  the  dreamland  of  More's  ideal  commonwealth. 

Temples,  nobly  built  and  spacious,  in  whose  solemn  twilight 
men  of  all  sects  meet,  in  spite  of  their  distinctions,  to  unite  in  a  pub- 
lic worship  avowedly  so  arranged  that  nothing  may  be  seen  or 
heard  which  shall  jar  with  the  feelings  of  any  class  of  the  worship- 
pers —  nothing  in  which  all  cannot  unite  (for  every  sect  performs 
its  own  peculiarites  in  private) :  no  images,  so  that  every  one 
may  represent  the  Deity  to  his  own  thoughts  in  his  own  way ;  no 
forms  of  prayer,  but  such  as  every  one  may  use  without  prejudice 
to  his  own  private  opinion  —  a  service  so  expressive  of  their 
common  brotherhood  that  they  think  it  a  great  impiety  to  enter 
upon  it  with  a  consciousness  of  anger  or  hatred  to  any  one,  with- 
out having  first  purified  their  hearts  and  reconciled  every  difference ;« 
incense  and  other  sweet  odors  and  waxen  lights  burned,  not  from 
any  notion  that  they  can  confer  any  benefit  on  God,  which  even 
men's  prayers  cannot,  but  because  they  are  useful  aids  to  the  wor- 
shippers ;  the  men  occupying  one  side  of  the  temple,  the  women  the 
other,  and  all  clothed  in  white;  the  whole  people  rising  as  the 
priest  who  conducts  the  worship  enters  the  temple  in  his  beautiful 
vestments,  wonderfully  wrought  of  birds'  plumage,  to  join  in 
hymns  of  praise,  accompanied  by  music ;  then  priest  and  people 
uniting  in  solemn  prayer  to  God  in  a  set  form  of  words,  so  com- 
posed that  each  can  apply  its  meaning  tQ_him§eJf,  offering  thanks 
for  the  blessings  which  surround  them,  for  the  happiness  of  their 
commonwealth,  for  their  having  embraced  a  religious  persuasion 
which  they  hope  is  the  most  true  one ;  praying  that  if  they  are  mis- 
taken they  may  be  led  to  what  is  really  the  true  one,  so  that  all 


The   New   Learning  —  Erasmus  and   More      245 

may  be  brought  to  unity  of  faith  and  practice,  unless  in  his  inscrut- 
able will  the  Almighty  should  otherwise  ordain;  and  concluding 
with  a  prayer  that,  as  soon  as  it  may  please  Him,  He  may  take  them 
to  Himself;  lastly,  this  prayer  concluded,  the  whole  congregation 
bowing  solemnly  to  the  ground,  and  then,  after  a  short  pause, 
separating  to  spend  the  remainder  of  the  day  in  innocent  amuse- 
ment —  this  was  More's  idea  of  public  worship ! 

Such  was  the  second  book  of  the  Utopia,  probably  written  by 
More  whilst  on  the  embassy,  toward  the  close  of  1515,  or  soon  after 
his  return.  Well  might  he  conclude  with  the  words,  "I  freely  con- 
fess that  many  things  in  the  commonwealth  of  Utopia  I  rather  wish 
than  hope  to  see  adopted  in  our  own ! " 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Froude,  Life  and  Letters  of  Erasmus.  Nichols,  The  Epistles  of  Erasmus. 
Emerton,  Erasmus,  especially  the  chapters  relating  to  his  life  in  England. 
Gasquet,  Eve  of  the  Reformation,  chap,  vi  on  Erasmus,  chap,  ii  on  the  re- 
vival of  letters,  and  chap,  viii  on  the  English  Bible.  Roper,  Life  of  Sir 
Thomas  More.  Lupton,  Life  of  Dean  Colet.  Einstein,  The  Italian  Re- 
naissance in  England,  Columbia  University  Press.  The  Cambridge  Modern 
History,  Vol.  I,  chap,  xvi  for  the  classical  Renaissance;  chap,  xvii  for  the 
Christian  Renaissance. 


CHAPTER  H 

ON  THE  EVE  OF  THE   SEPARATION   FROM   ROUE 

THE  state  of  religious  opinion  in  England  on  the  eve  of  the 
separation  of  the  English  Church  from  Roman  authority  is  exceed- 
ingly difficult  to  determine.  It  is  very  hard,  indeed,  to  state  even 
the  problems  to  be  solved  in  the  ascertainment  of  that  condition. 
There  is  no  way  of  knowing  the  number  of  men  who  were  dissatis- 
fied with  the  Church  or  its  doctrines.  It  is  often  claimed,  however, 
that  the  Church  was  steadily  declining  in  authority,  and  that  the 
growing  dissatisfaction  with  the  prevailing  ecclesiastical  policy 
would  have  soon  broken  England  away  from  the  Roman  com- 
munion even  if  Henry  VIII  had  not  found  an  excuse  for  a  quick 
and  violent  severance  of  the  ancient  ties.  This  view  is  given  in  the 
famous  History  of  England  by  Mr.  Froude,  from  which  this  extract 
is  taken.  An  examination  of  the  footnotes  cited  in  the  original 
volume  itself  gives  an  interesting  insight  into  the  nature  of  the 
evidence  for  the  conclusions  and  into  the  methods  employed  by  the 
author. 

§  i.   Changes  Since  the  Day  of  Henry  II1 

Times  were  changed  in  England  since  the  second  Henry  walked 
barefoot  through  the  streets  of  Canterbury,  and  knelt  while  the 
monks  flogged  him  on  the  pavement  in  the  Chapterhouse,  doing 
penance  for  Becket's  murder.  The  clergy  had  won  the  battle  in 
the  twelfth  century  because  they  deserved  to  win  it.  They  were  not 
free  from  fault  and  weakness,  but  they  felt  the  meaning  of  their 
profession.  Their  hearts  were  in  their  vows ;  their  authority  was 
exercised  more  justly,  more  nobly,  than  the  authority  of  the  crown ; 
and  therefore,  with  inevitable  justice,  the  crown  was  compelled  to 
stoop  before  them.  The  victory  was  great;  but,  like  many  vic- 
tories, it  was  fatal  to  the  conquerors.  It  filled  them  full  with  the 

1  Froude,  History  oj  England,  Vol.  I,  chap.  ii. 
246 


On  the  Eve  of  the  Separation  from   Rome     247 

vanity  of  power;  they  forgot  their  duties  in  their  privileges;  and 
when  a  century  later  the  conflict  recommenced,  the  altering  issue 
proved  the  altering  nature  of  the  conditions  under  which  it  was 
fought.  The  laity  were  sustained  in  vigor  by  the  practical  obliga- 
tions of  life ;  the  clergy  sank  under  the  influence  of  a  waning  reli- 
gion, the  administration  of  the  forms  of  which  had  become  their 
sole  occupation ;  and  as  character  forsook  them,  the  mortmain  act, 
the  acts  of  praemunire,  and  the  repeatedly  recurring  statutes  of 
provisors  mark  the  successive  defeats  that  drove  them  back  from 
the  high  post  of  command  which  character  alone  had  earned  for 
them. 

If  the  Black  Prince  had  lived,  or  if  Richard  II  had  inherited  the 
temper  of  the  Plantagenets,  the  ecclesiastical  system  would  have 
been  spared  the  misfortune  of  a  longer  reprieve.  Its  worst  abuses 
would  have  then  terminated,  and  the  reformation  of  doctrine  in  the 
sixteenth  century  would  have  been  left  to  fight  its  independent  way 
unsupported  by  the  moral  corruption  of  the  Church  from  which  it 
received  its  most  powerful  impetus.  The  nation  was  ready  for 
sweeping  remedies.  The  people  felt  little  loyalty  to  the  pope,  as 
the  language  of  the  statutes  of  provisors  conclusively  proves,  and 
they  were  prepared  to  risk  the  sacrilege  of  confiscating  the  estates 
of  the  religious  houses  —  a  complete  measure  of  secularization 
being  then,  as  I  have  already  said,  the  expressed  desire  of  the  House 
of  Commons.  With  an  Edward  III  on  the  throne  such  a  measure 
would  very  likely  have  been  executed,  and  the  course  of  English 
history  would  have  been  changed.  It  was  ordered  otherwise, 
and  doubtlessly  wisely.  The  Church  was  allowed  a  hundred  and 
fifty  more  years  to  fill  full  the  measure  of  her  offences,  that  she 
might  fall  only  when  time  had  laid  bare  the  root  of  her  degeneracy, 
and  that  faith  and  manners  might  be  changed  together. 

§  2.    The  Church  in  the  Fifteenth  Century 

The  history  of  the  time  is  too  imperfect  to  justify  a  positive  con- 
clusion. It  is  possible,  however,  that  the  success  of  the  revolution 
effected  by  Henry  IV  was  due  in  part  to  a  reaction  in  the  Church's 
favor;  and  it  is  certain  that  this  prince,  if  he  did  not  owe  his  crown 
to  the  support  of  the  Church,  determined  to  conciliate  it.  He  con- 
firmed the  statutes  of  provisors,  but  he  allowed  them  to  sink  into 
disuse.  He  forbade  the  further  mooting  of  the  confiscation  project, 
and  to  him  is  due  the  first  permission  of  the  bishops  to  send  heretics 
to  the  stake.  If  English  tradition  is  to  be  trusted,  the  clergy  still 


248  English  Historians 

felt  insecure ;  and  the  French  wars  of  Henry  V  are  said  to  have  been 
undertaken,  as  we  all  know  from  Shakspeare,  at  the  persuasion  of 
Archbishop  Chichele,  who  desired  to  distract  his  attention  from 
reverting  to  dangerous  subjects.  Whether  this  be  true  or  not, 
no  prince  of  the  House  of  Lancaster  betrayed  a  wish  to  renew  the 
quarrel  with  the  Church.  The  battle  of  Agincourt,  the  conquest 
and  reconquest  of  France,  called  off  the  attention  of  the  people; 
while  the  rise  of  the  Lollards  and  the  intrusion  of  speculative  ques- 
tions, the  agitation  of  which  has  ever  been  the  chief  aversion  of 
English  statesmen,  contributed  to  change  the  current;  and  the  re- 
forming spirit  must  have  lulled  before  the  outbreak  of  the  Wars  of 
the  Roses,  or  one  of  the  two  parties  in  so  desperate  a  struggle 
would  have  scarcely  failed  to  have  availed  themselves  of  it.  Ed- 
ward IV  is  said  to  have  been  lenient  toward  heresy ;  but  his  tolera- 
tion, if  it  was  more  than  imaginary,  was  tacit  only;  he  never  ven- 
tured to  avow  it.  It  is  more  likely  that  in  the  inveterate  frenzy 
of  those  years  men  had  no  leisure  to  remember  that  heresy  existed. 
The  clergy  were  thus  left  undisturbed  to  go  their  own  course  to 
its  natural  end.  The  storm  had  passed  over  them  without  break- 
ing, and  they  did  not  dream  that  it  would  gather  again.  The 
immunity  which  they  enjoyed  from  the  general  sufferings  of  the 
civil  war  contributed  to  deceive  them;  and  without  anxiety  for 
the  consequences,  and  forgetting  the  significant  warning  which 
they  had  received,  they  sank  steadily  into  that  condition  which  is 
inevitable  from  the  constitution  of  human  nature,  among  men 
without  faith,  wealthy,  powerful,  and  luxuriously  fed,  yet  con- 
demned to  celibacy,  and  cut  off  from  the  common  duties  and  com- 
mon pleasures  of  ordinary  life.  On  the  return  of  a  settled  govern- 
ment they  were  startled  for  a  moment  in  their  security ;  the  conduct 
of  some  among  them  had  become  so  unbearable  that  even  Henry 
VII,  who  inherited  the  Lancastrian  sympathies,  was  compelled 
to  notice  it;  and  the  following  brief  act  was  passed  by  his  first 
Parliament,  proving  by  the  very  terms  in  which  it  is  couched  the 
existing  nature  of  church  discipline.  "For  the  more  sure  and 
likely  reformation,"  it  runs,  "of  priests,  clerks,  and  religious  men 
culpable,  or  by  their  demerits  openly  noised  of  incontinent  living 
in  their  bodies,  contrary  to  their  order,  be  it  enacted,  ordained,  and 
established,  that  it  be  lawful  to  all  archbishops  and  bishops,  and 
other  ordinaries  having  episcopal  jurisdiction,  to  punish  and  chas- 
tise such  religious  men,  being  within  the  bounds  of  their  jurisdic- 
tion, as  shall  be  convict  before  them,  by  lawful  proof,  of  adultery, 
fornication,  incest,  or  other  fleshly  incontinency,  by  committing 


On  the  Eve  of  the  Separation  from  Rome     249 

them  to  ward  and  prison,  there  to  remain  for  such  time  as  shall  be 
thought  convenient  for  the  quality  of  their  trespasses." 

Previous  to  the  passing  of  this  act,  therefore,  the  bishops,  who 
had  power  to  arrest  laymen  on  suspicion  of  heresy,  and  detain  them 
in  prison  untried,  had  no  power  to  imprison  priests,  even  though 
convicted  of  adultery  or  incest.  The  legislature  were  supported 
by  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Cardinal  Morton  procured 
authority  from  the  pope  to  visit  the  religious  houses,  the  abomina- 
tion of  which  had  become  notorious;  and  in  a  provincial  synod 
held  on  the  24th  of  February,  1486,  he  laid  the  condition  of  the 
secular  clergy  before  the  assembled  prelates.  Many  priests, 
it  was  stated,  spent  their  time  in  hawking  or  hunting,  in  lounging 
at  taverns,  in  the  dissolute  enjoyment  of  the  world.  They  wore 
their  hair  long  like  laymen ;  they  were  to  be  seen  lounging  in  the 
streets  with  cloak  and  doublet,  sword  and  dagger.  By  the  scandal 
of  their  lives  they  imperilled  the  stability  of  their  order.  A  num- 
ber of  the  worst  offenders,  in  London  especially,  were  summoned 
before  the  synod  and  admonished;  certain  of  the  more  zealous 
among  the  learned  (complures  docti)  who  had  preached  against 
clerical  abuses  were  advised  to  be  more  cautious,  for  the  avoiding 
of  scandal;  but  the  archbishop,  taking  the  duty  upon  himself, 
sent  round  a  circular  among  the  clergy  of  his  province  exhorting 
them  to  general  amendment. 

Yet  this  little  cloud  again  disappeared.  Henry  VII  sat  too 
insecurely  on  his  throne  to  venture  on  a  resolute  reform,  even  if  his 
feelings  had  inclined  him  towards  it,  which  they  did  not.  Morton 
durst  not  resolutely  grapple  with  the  evil.  He  rebuked  and  re- 
monstrated ;  but  punishment  would  have  caused  a  public  scandal. 
He  would  not  invite  the  inspection  of  the  laity  into  a  disease  which, 
without  their  assistance,  he  had  not  the  strength  to  encounter,  and 
his  incipient  reformation  died  away  ineffectually  in  words.  The 
Church,  to  outward  appearance,  stood  more  securely  than  ever. 
The  obnoxious  statutes  of  the  Plantagenets  were  in  abeyance; 
their  very  existence,  as  it  seemed,  was  forgotten;  and  Thomas 
a  Becket  never  desired  more  absolute  independence  for  the  eccle- 
siastical order  than  Archbishop  Warham  found  established  when 
he  succeeded  to  the  primacy.  He,  too,  ventured  to  repeat  the  ex- 
periment of  his  predecessor.  In  1511  he  attempted  a  second 
visitation  of  the  monasteries,  and  again  exhorted  a  reform;  but 
his  efforts  were  even  slighter  than  Morton's,  and  in  their  results 
equally  without  fruit.  The  maintenance  of  his  order  in  its  polit- 
ical supremacy  was  of  greater  moment  to  him  than  its  moral 


250  English  Historians 

purity;   a  decent  veil  was  cast  over  the  clerical  infirmities,  and 
their  vices  were  forgotten  as  soon  as  they  ceased  to  be  proclaimed. 

§  3.  Henry  VIII,  Wolsey,  and  the  Church 

Henry  VIII,  a  mere  boy  on  his  accession,  was  borne  away  with 
the  prevailing  stream;  and  trained  from  his  childhood  by  theo- 
logians, he  entered  upon  his  reign  saturated  with  theological  pre- 
possessions. The  intensity  of  his  nature  recognizing  no  half 
measures,  he  was  prepared  to  make  them  the  law  of  his  life,  and 
so  zealous  was  he  that  it  seemed  as  if  the  Church  had  found 
in  him  a  new  Alfred  or  a  Charlemagne.  Unfortunately  for  the 
Church,  institutions  may  be  restored  in  theory;  but  theory,  be 
it  never  so  perfect,  will  not  give  them  back  their  life;  and  Henry 
discovered  at  length  that  the  Church  of  the  sixteenth  century  as 
little  resembled  the  Church  of  the  eleventh  as  Leo  X  resembled 
Hildebrand,  or  Warham  resembled  St.  Anselm. 

If,  however,  there  were  no  longer  saints  among  the  clergy,  there 
could  still  arise  among  them  a  remarkable  man ;  and  in  Cardinal 
Wolsey  the  king  found  an  adviser  who  was  able  to  retain  him 
longer  than  would  otherwise  have  been  possible  in  the  course 
which  he  had  entered  upon ;  who,  holding  a  middle  place  between 
an  English  statesman  and  a  Catholic  of  the  old  order,  was  essen- 
tially a  transition  minister;  and  who  was  qualified,  above  all  men 
then  living,  by*  a  combination  of  talent,  honesty,  and  arrogance, 
to  open  questions  which  could  not  again  be  closed  when  they  had 
escaped  the  grasp  of  their  originator.  Under  Wolsey's  influence 
Henry  made  war  with  Louis  of  France,  in  the  pope's  quarrel, 
entered  the  polemic  lists  with  Luther,  and  persecuted  the  English 
Protestants.  But  Wolsey  could  not  blind  himself  to  the  true  con- 
dition of  the  Church.  He  was  too  wise  to  be  deceived  with  out- 
ward prosperity;  he  knew  well  that  there  lay  before  it,  in  Europe 
and  at  home,  the  alternative  of  ruin  or  amendment,  and  therefore 
he  familiarized  Henry  with  the  sense  that  a  reformation  was  in- 
evitable, and  dreaming  that  it  could  be  effected  from  within,  by 
the  Church  itself  inspired  with  a  wiser  spirit,  he  himself  fell  the 
first  victim  of  a  convulsion  which  he  had  assisted  to  create,  and 
which  he  attempted  too  late  to  stay. 

His  intended  measures  were  approaching  maturity  when  all 
Europe  was  startled  by  the  news  that  Rome  had  been  stormed  by 
the  imperial  army,  that  the  pope  was  imprisoned,  the  churches 
pillaged,  the  cardinals  insulted,  and  all  holiest  things  polluted 


On  the  Eve  of  the  Separation  from   Rome     251 

and  profaned.  A  spectator,  judging  only  by  outward  symptoms, 
would  have  seen  at  that  strange  crisis  in  Charles  V  the  worst  patron 
of  heresy,  and  the  most  dangerous  enemy  of  the  Holy  See;  while 
the  indignation  with  which  the  news  of  these  outrages  was  received 
at  the  English  court  would  have  taught  him  to  look  on  Henry 
as  the  one  sovereign  in  Europe  on  whom  that  See  might  calculate 
most  surely  for  support  in  its  hour  of  danger.  If  he  could  have 
pierced  below  the  surface,  he  would  have  found  that  the  pope's 
best  friend  was  the  prince  who  held  him  prisoner;  that  Henry 
was  but  doubtfully  acquiescing  in  the  policy  of  an  unpopular 
minister;  and  that  the  English  nation  would  have  looked  on  with 
stoical  resignation  if  pope  and  papacy  had  been  wrecked  together. 
They  were  not  inclined  to  heresy;  but  the  ecclesiastical  system 
was  not  the  Catholic  faith,  and  this  system,  ruined  by  prosperity, 
was  fast  pressing  its  excesses  to  the  extreme  limit,  beyond  which 
it  could  not  be  endured. 

Wolsey  talked  of  reformation,  but  delayed  its  coming,  and  in 
the  meantime  the  persons  to  be  reformed  showed  no  fear  that  it 
would  come  at  all.  The  monasteries  grew  worse  and  worse. 
The  people  were  taught  only  what  they  could  teach  themselves. 
The  consistory  courts  became  more  oppressive.  Pluralities  mul- 
tiplied, and  non-residence  and  profligacy.  Favored  parish  clergy 
held  as  many  as  eight  benefices.  Bishops  accumulated  sees,  and, 
unable  to  attend'  to  all,  attended  to  none.  Wolsey  himself,  the 
church  reformer  (so  little  did  he  really  know  what  a  reformation 
meant),  was  at  once  Archbishop  of  York,  Bishop  of  Winchester, 
of  Bath,  and  of  Durham,  and  Abbot  of  St.  Albans.  In  Latimer's 
opinion,  even  twenty  years  later,  and  after  no  little  reform  in  such 
matters,  there  was  but  one  bishop  in  all  England  who  was  ever 
at  his  work  and  ever  in  his  diocese.  "I  would  ask  a  strange 
question,"  he  said,  in  an  audacious  sermon  at  Paul's  Cross,  "Who 
is  the  most  diligent  bishop  and  prelate  in  all  England  that  passeth 
all  the  rest  in  doing  of  his  office  ?  I  can  tell,  for  I  know  him  who 
it  is;  I  know  him  well.  But  now  I  think  I  see  you  listening  and 
hearkening  that  I  should  name  him.  There  is  one  that  passeth 
all  the  others,  and  is  the  most  diligent  prelate  and  preacher  in  all 
England.  And  will  ye  know  who  it  is  ?  I  will  tell  you.  It  is 
the  devil.  Among  all  the  pack  of  them  that  have  cure,  the  devil 
shall  go  for  my  money,  for  he  applieth  his  business.  Therefore  ye 
unpreaching  prelates,  learn  of  the  devil  to  be  diligent  in  your  office. 
If  ye  will  not  learn  of  God,  for  shame  learn  of  the  devil." 

Under  such  circumstances,  we  need  not  be  surprised  to  find 


252  English   Historians 

the  clergy  sunk  low  in  the  respect  of  the  English  people.  Sternly 
intolerant  of  each  other's  faults,  the  laity  were  not  likely  to  be 
indulgent  to  the  vices  of  men  who  ought  to  have  set  an  example 
of  purity;  and  from  time  to  time,  during  the  first  quarter  of  the 
century,  there  were  explosions  of  temper  which  might  have  served 
as  a  warning  if  any  sense  or  judgment  had  been  led  to  profit  by 
it.  ... 

§  4.   Complexity  of  Motives  in  Human  Affairs 

It  is  never  more  difficult  to  judge  equitably  the  actions  of  public 
men  than  when  private  as  well  as  general  motives  have  been  al- 
lowed to  influence  them,  or  when  their  actions  may  admit  of  being 
represented  as  resulting  from  personal  inclination,  as  well  as  from 
national  policy.  In  life,  as  we  actually  experience  it,  motives  slide 
one  into  the  other,  and  the  most  careful  analysis  will  fail  adequately 
to  sift  them.  In  history,  from  the  effort  to  make  our  conceptions 
distinct,  we  pronounce  upon  these  intricate  matters  with  unhesi- 
tating certainty,  and  we  lose  sight  of  truth  in  the  desire  to  make 
it  truer  than  itself.  The  difficulty  is  further  complicated  by  the 
different  points  of  view  which  are  chosen  by  contemporaries  and 
by  posterity.  Where  motives  are  mixed,  men  all  naturally  dwell 
most  on  those  which  approach  nearest  to  themselves;  contem- 
poraries whose  interests  are  at  stake  overlook  what  is  personal  in 
consideration  of  what  is  to  them  of  broader  moment;  posterity, 
unable  to  realize  political  embarrassments  which  have  ceased  to 
concern  them,  concentrate  their  attention  on  such  features  of  the 
story  as  touch  their  own  sympathies,  and  attend  exclusively  to 
the  private  and  personal  passions  of  the  men  and  women  whose 
character  they  are  considering. 

These  natural,  and  to  some  extent  inevitable,  tendencies  explain 
the  difference  with  which  the  divorce  between  Henry  VIII  and 
Catherine  of  Aragon  has  been  regarded  by  the  English  nation 
in  the  sixteenth  and  nineteenth  centuries.  In  the  former,  not 
only  did  the  Parliament  profess  to  desire  it,  urge  it,  and  further  it, 
but  we  are  told  by  a  contemporary  that  "all  indifferent  and  dis- 
creet persons"  judged  that  it  was  right  and  necessary.  In  the 
latter,  perhaps,  there  is  not  one  of  ourselves  who  has  not  been 
taught  to  look  upon  it  as  an  act  of  enormous  wickedness.  In  the 
sixteenth  century,  Queen  Catherine  was  an  obstacle  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  kingdom,  an  incentive  to  treasonable  hopes.  In 
the  nineteenth,  she  is  an  outraged  and  injured  wife,  the  victim 
of  a  false  husband's  fickle  appetite.  The  story  is  a  long  and  pain- 


On  the  Eve  of  the  Separation  from   Rome     253 

ful  one,  and  on  its  personal  side  need  not  concern  us  here  further 
than  as  it  illustrates  the  private  character  of  Henry.  Into  the  pub- 
lic bearing  of  it  I  must  enter  at  some  length,  in  order  to  explain 
the  interest  with  which  the  nation  threw  itself  into  the  question, 
and  to  remove  the  scandal  with  which,  had  nothing  been  at  stake 
beyond  the  inclinations  of  a  profligate  monarch,  weary  of  his  queen, 
the  complaisance  on  such  a  subject  of  the  lords  and  commons  of 
England  would  have  colored  the  entire  complexion  of  the  Refor- 
mation. 

§  5.    The  Divorce  and  State  Policy 

The  succession  to  the  throne,  although  determined  in  theory 
by  the  ordinary  law  of  primogeniture,  was  nevertheless  subject 
to  repeated  arbitrary  changes.  The  uncertainty  of  the  rule  was 
acknowledged  and  deplored  by  the  Parliament,  and  there  was  no 
order  of  which  the  nation,  with  any  unity  of  sentiment,  compelled 
the  observance.  An  opinion  prevailed  —  not  I  believe  traceable 
to  statute,  but  admitted  by  custom,  and  having  the  force  of  statute 
in  the  prejudices  of  the  nation  —  that  no  stranger  born  out  of  the 
realm  could  inherit.  Although  the  descent  in  the  female  line 
was  not  formally  denied,  no  female  sovereign  had  ever,  in  fact,  sat 
upon  the  throne.  Even  Henry  VII  refused  to  strengthen  his  title 
by  advancing  the  claims  of  his  wife;  and  the  uncertainty  of  the 
laws  of  marriage,  and  the  innumerable  refinements  of  the  Romish 
canon  law,  which  affected  the  legitimacy  of  children,  furnished, 
in  connection  with  the  further  ambiguities  of  clerical  dispensations, 
perpetual  pretexts,  whenever  pretexts  were  needed,  for  a  breach 
of  allegiance.  So  long,  indeed,  as  the  character  of  the  nation  re- 
mained essentially  military,  it  could  as  little  tolerate  an  incapable 
king  as  an  army  in  a  dangerous  campaign  can  bear  with  an  in- 
efficient commander;  and  whatever  might  be  the  theory  of  the 
title,  when  the  sceptre  was  held  by  the  infirm  hand  of  an  Edward 
II,  a  Richard  II,  or  a  Henry  VI,  the  difficulty  resolved  itself  by 
force,  and  it  was  wrenched  by  a  stronger  arm  from  a  grasp  too 
feeble  to  retain  it.  The  consent  of  the  nation  was  avowed,  even 
in  the  authoritative  language  of  a  statute,  as  essential  to  the  legit- 
imacy of  a  sovereign's  title ;  and  Sir  Thomas  More,  on  examina- 
tion by  the  solicitor-general,  declared  as  his  opinion  that  Parlia- 
ment had  power  to  depose  kings  if  it  so  pleased. 

So  many  uncertainties  on  a  point  so  vital  had  occasioned  fearful 
episodes  in  English  history;  the  most  fearful  of  them,  which  had 
traced  its  character  in  blood  in  the  private  records  of  every  Eng- 


254  English  Historians 

lish  family,  having  been  the  long  struggle  of  the  preceding  century 
frorn  which  the  nation  was  still  suffering  and  had  but  recovered 
sufficiently  to  be  conscious  of  what  it  had  endured.  It  had  deci- 
mated itself  for  a  question  which  involved  no  principle  and  led  to 
no  result,  and  perhaps  the  history  of  the  world  may  be  searched 
in  vain  for  any  parallel  to  a  quarrel  at  once  so  desperate  and  so 
unmeaning.  .  .  . 

No  effort  of  imagination  can  reproduce  to  us  the  state  of  this 
country  in  the  fatal  years  which  intervened  between  the  first  rising 
of  the  Duke  of  York  and  the  battle  of  Bosworth,  and  experience 
too  truly  convinced  Henry  VII  that  the  war  had  ceased  only  from 
general  exhaustion,  and  not  because  there  was  no  will  to  continue 
it.  The  first  Tudor  breathed  an  atmosphere  of  suspended  in- 
surrection, and  only  when  we  remember  the  probable  effect  upon 
his  mind  of  the  constant  dread  of  an  explosion  can  we  excuse  or 
understand,  in  a  prince  not  generally  cruel,  the  execution  of  the 
Earl  of  Warwick.  The  danger  of  a  bloody  revolution  may  present 
an  act  of  arbitrary  or  cowardly  tyranny  in  the  light  of  a  public  duty. 

Fifty  years  of  settled  government,  however,  had  not  been  with- 
out their  effects.  The  country  had  collected  itself;  the  feuds 
of  the  great  families  had  been  chastened,  if  they  had  not  been  sub- 
dued ;  while  the  increase  of  wealth  and  material  prosperity  had 
brought  out  into  obvious  prominence  those  advantages  of  peace 
which  a  hot-spirited  people,  antecedent  to  experience,  had  not 
anticipated,  and  had  not  been  able  to  appreciate.  They  were 
better  fed,  better  cared  for,  more  justly  governed,  than  they  had 
ever  been  before;  and  though  abundance  of  unruly  tempers  re- 
mained, yet  the  wiser  portion  of  the  nation,  looking  back  from 
their  new  vantage-ground,  were  able  to  recognize  the  past  in  its 
true  hatefulness.  Thenceforward  a  war  of  succession  was  the  pre- 
dominating terror  with  English  statesmen,  and  the  safe  establish- 
ment of  the  reigning  family  bore  a  degree  of  importance  which 
it  is  possible  that  their  fears  exaggerated,  yet  which  in  fact  was 
the  determining  principle  of  their  action. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Gairdner,  A  History  of  the  English  Church  in  the  Sixteenth  Century, 
chaps,  i,  ii,  iv,  and  v.  Brewer,  The  Reign  of  Henry  VIII,  Vol.  II,  chap. 
xxxv.  Gasquet,  Henry  VIII  and  the  English  Monasteries,  chap,  i;  Eve  of 
the  Reformation,  chap,  iii  on  the  "Two  Jurisdictions,"  and  chap,  iv  on 
"  England  and  the  Pope."  The  Cambridge  Modern  History,  Vol.  I,  chaps, 
xviii  and  xix,  for  the  Church  and  Europe  on  the  eve  of  the  Reformation 
Creighton,  History  of  the  Papacy  during  the  Period  of  the  Reformation. 


CHAPTER  III 

PARLIAMENT  AND  THE  BREACH  WITH  ROME 

AFTER  unsatisfactory  negotiations  with  the  pope  for  a  decree 
of  separation  from  Queen  Catherine,  Henry  VIII  in  1529  deter- 
mined to  bring  still  greater  pressure  to  bear  in  the  interest  of  his 
case.  In  that  year  he  called  the  famous  "Reformation  Parlia- 
ment," which  was  destined  to  last  seven  years  and  pass  measure 
after  measure  until  the  dispute  culminated  in  declaring  Henry  the 
supreme  head  of  the  English  Church.  The  question  as  to  whether 
this  Parliament  fairly  represented  the  will  of  the  nation  constitutes 
a  very  important  problem.  If  it  did,  there  must  have  been  a 
strong  anti-papal  sentiment  on  the  eve  of  the  ecclesiastical  revolu- 
tion. The  fact,  however,  that  many  if  not  all  of  the  great  measures 
were  prepared  by  royal  favorites  and  promptly  passed  by  Par- 
liament has  led  some  writers  to  regard  it  as  no  way  representative 
of  the  nation,  but  a  packed  body  constituting  a  servile  tool  of  the 
king.  Such  is  the  view  of  Mr.  Brewer  in  his  History  0}  Henry 
VIII  to  the  Fall  0}  Wolsey.  On  the  other  hand,  I'/Ir.  Pollard  in 
the  tenth  chapter  of  his  volume  on  Henry  VIII  controverts  this  con- 
clusion and  maintains  that  the  Reformation  Parliament  was  fairly 
representative  of  the  national  will.  It  must  be  admitted,  however, 
that  it  will  take  a  far  more  detailed  analysis  of  the  history  of  that 
Parliament  than  has  ever  been  made  to  settle  finally  this  very 
complicated  problem.  Even  Mr.  Pollard  admits  that  the  Parlia- 
ment would  probably  have  been  dissolved  after  a  few  weeks  if 
Clement  had  granted  the  separation.  But  the  pope  would  not 
or  could  not  yield,  and  Parliament  finally  passed  the  last  great 
acts  which  repudiated  papal  authority.  A  temperate  and  scholarly 
account  of  the  work  of  this  Parliament  is  to  be  found  in  Dixon's 
History  of  the  Church  of  England. 

255 


256  English  Historians 


§  i.   The  Act  Relating  to  Annates,  Bulls,  and  Election  of  Bishops  ! 

The  houses  met  January  15,  1534.  Scarce  a  third  of  the  spir- 
itual lords  were  present.  Out  of  twenty-six  abbots  fourteen 
were  away ;  and  of  the  bishops  none  other  appeared  but  Canter- 
bury, London,  Winchester,  Lincoln,  Bath  and  Wells,  Llandaff, 
and  Carlisle.  During  the  session  the  preachers  at  Paul's  Cross 
preached  every  Sunday  against  the  authority  of  the  pope  in  Eng- 
land, by  order  of  the  council. 

Of  the  three  great  acts  of  the  session  which  were  directed 
against  Rome,  the  first  which  passed  bore  the  title  of  an  act  "for 
the  restraint  of  annates,"  or  "for  the  non-payment  of  firstfruits 
to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,"  but  it  was  also  called,  when  it  first  ap- 
peared, a  "bill  concerning  the  consecration  of  bishops."  .  .  . 
In  this,  as  in  the  other  enactments  regarding  Rome,  a  less  defer- 
ential style  marked  the  growing  alienation  of  the  kingdom.  The 
"pope's  holiness"  of  former  statutes  was  constantly  henceforth 
"the  Bishop  of  Rome,  otherwise  called  the  pope." 

The  body  of  the  act  may  be  briefly  described.  Whereas  the 
act  about  annates  which  was  made  two  years  before,  reserved 
certain  payments  for  bulls  procured  from  the  See  of  Rome  on  the 
election  of  every  bishop,  this  Act  extinguished  all  such  payments 
without  reserve;  it  forbade  bulls,  breves,  or  any  other  thing  to 
be  procured  from  Rome,  and  confined  the  elections  of  bishops 
entirely  within  the  kingdom..  As  to  the  form  and  manner  of  their 
election,  it  was  least  of  all  to  be  expected  that  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land should  haVe  recovered  now  her  long-lost  liberty  in  this  impor- 
tant particular;  but  the  nominal  freedom  which  she  had  enjoyed 
of  old  was  not  disturbed  unnecessarily.  From  remote  antiquity 
the  theory  had  been  that  the  prelates  of  churches  and  monasteries 
should  be  freely  elected  by  chapters  and  convents,  the  election 
being  afterwards  confirmed  by  the  consent  of  the  king  and  the 
council  of  the  realm.  But  this  theory  was  rarely  real,  the  kings  in 
various  ways  generally  contriving  to  overrule  the  elections,  whether 
by  nominating,  investing,  or  signifying  the  candidate  whom  they 
preferred.  The  last  formal  settlement  of  the  matter  had  been  in 
the  time  of  King  John,  who  in  one  of  his  charters  conceded  that 
the  election  of  all  bishops  and  abbots  should  be  free  and  canonical, 
the  king's  license  to  elect,  or  conge"  d'tlire,  being  first  procured. 

1  Dixon,  History  of  the  Church  of  England,  Vol.  I,  pp.  180  ff.  By  per- 
mission of  the  Delegates  of  the  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford. 


Parliament  and  the  Breach  with   Rome         257 

But  the  charter  of  John  was  of  no  avail  in  protecting  the  liberty 
of  the  churches ;  and  the  last  of  the  royal  inventions  had  been  to 
accompany  the  license  to  elect  with  a  letter  missive  to  signify  to 
the  chapter  the  person  whom  the  king  desired  to  be  elected. 

In  the  act  which  now  passed,  the  old  process  of  the  license  to 
elect,  or  conge  d'elire,  and  the  old  abuse  of  royal  nomination,  in 
the  shape  of  the  letter  missive,  were  both  continued ;  but  the  latter 
was  made  part  of  the  statute  law  of  England  for  the  first  time. 
If  the  chapter  failed  to  elect  in  a  certain  number  of  days,  they  were 
placed  under  a  pragmunire,  and  the  king  proceeded  to  fill  the 
vacancy  by  simple  nomination,  without  further  regard  to  them. 
The  bishop  elect  was  to  make  his  corporal  oath  to  the  king,  and  to 
none  other. 

§  2.   The  Act  Concerning  Papal  Revenues  from  England 

This  act  was  completed  by  another,  "The  act  concerning 
Peter-pence  and  dispensations,"  called  also  "for  the  exoneration 
from  exactions  paid  to  the  See  of  Rome,"  but  which  seems  at 
first  to  have  borne  the  franker  title  of  "a  bill  for  the  abrogation 
of  the  usurped  authority  of  the  Roman  pontiff."  .  .  . 

This  was  the  statute  which  the  lawyers  describe  as  discharging 
the  subject  from  all  dependence  on  the  See  of  Rome.  It  bore 
the  form  of  a  petition  or  supplication  to  the  king,  to  whom  it  set 
forth  the  intolerable  exactions  which  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  other- 
wise called  the  pope,  and  his  chambers,  which  he  called  apostolic, 
took  out  of  the  realm,  of  usurpation  and  sufferance.  There  were 
"pensions,  censes,  Peter-pence,  procurations,  fruits,  suits  for  pro- 
visions, and  expeditions  of  bulls  for  archbishoprics  and  bishoprics, 
and  for  delegacies  and  rescripts  in  causes  of  contentions  and  appeals, 
jurisdictions  legatine ;  and  also  for  dispensations,  licenses,  fac- 
ulties, grants,  relaxations,  writs  called  perinde  valere,  rehabili- 
tations, abolitions,  and  other  infinite  sorts  of  bulls,  breves,  and 
instruments  of  sundry  natures,  names,  and  kinds,  in  great  number," 
of  which  the  catalogue  seemed  swollen  by  the  zeal  of  recitation. 

It  was,  however,  no  doubt  true  that  the  pope  got  much  money 
out  of  England,  more  perhaps  than  from  any  other  country;  and 
that  the  English  nation  had  been  treated  formerly  by  the  popes 
with  far  less  consideration  than  they  deserved  by  their  piety.  The 
remonstrances  of  the  English  nation  against  the  intolerable  and 
incessant  exactions  of  the  pope  had  been  heard  even  in  the  highest 
day  of  papal  domination;  all  orders  of  men  in  the  kingdom  had 


258  English  Historians 

joined  in  these  representations ;  and  by  the  heads  of  the  religious 
houses  especially,  the  high  pontiff  had  been  warned  that  his  con- 
duct would  eventually  cause  a  schism.  This  ancient  prediction 
was  fulfilled  at  length ;  and  from  the  venerable  contribution  known 
as  Peter-pence  down  to  the  latest  paper  figment  of  the  apostolic 
chamber,  all  payments  to  the  See  of  Rome  were  swept  away  for- 
ever. It  was  declared  that  the  realm  was  free  from  any  laws  of 
man,  but  such  as  had  been  devised  within  the  same;  and  that  it 
lay  with  the  king  and  the  Parliament,  the  "lords  spiritual  and  tem- 
poral, and  the  commons,  representing  the  whole  state  of  the  realm, 
in  the  most  high  court  of  Parliament,"  to  abrogate,  annul,  alter, 
or  diminish  all  such  laws;  and  "not  only  to  dispense,  but  also  to 
authorize  some  elect  person  or  persons  to  dispense  with  those 
and  all  other  human  laws  of  the  realm,  as  the  quality  of  the  persons 
and  matter  should  require." 

§  3.   Transference  of  Spiritual  Jurisdiction 

The  spiritual  jurisdiction,  therefore,  which  had  been  usurped 
by  the  See  of  Rome  was  transferred  to  the  See  of  Canterbury.  All 
licenses,  dispensations,  and  other  instruments  which  were  needful 
were  to  be  granted  henceforth  by  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
under  restrictions  which  were  elaborately  specified  in  the  act. 
The  laborious  language  employed  sufficiently  indicates  that  the 
framers  of  the  act  understood  and  desired  to  maintain  the  dis- 
tinction between  the  spiritualities  of  a  bishop  and  his  high  priestly 
office:  the  former  only  were  termed  "human  laws,"  subject  to 
the  control  of  the  powers  of  the  realm ;  and  nothing  pertaining  to 
a  bishop  was  regarded  therein  but  that  spiritual  jurisdiction  which 
can  be  exercised  by  that  ecclesiastical  officer,  called  "the  guardian 
of  the  spiritualities,"  whom  the  law  provides  during  the  vacancy 
of  a  see. 

It  was  this  spiritual  jurisdiction  only  which  was,  or  could  be, 
transferred  from  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  the  Bishop  of  Canterbury, 
because  it  was  this  only  which  had  been,  or  could  have  been,  usurped 
by  the  Bishop  of  Rome.  And  therefore  it  could  be  added  that  the 
king,  his  nobles  and  subjects,  intended  not  "to  decline  or  vary 
from  the  congregation  of  Christ's  Church  in  any  things  concerning 
the  very  articles  of  the  Catholic  faith  of  Christendom,  or  in  any 
other  things  declared  by  Holy  Scripture  and  the  word  of  God 
necessary  for  their  salvation ;  but  only  to  make  an  ordinance  by 
policies  necessary  to  suppress  vice  and  for  the  good  conservation 


Parliament  and  the  Breach  with  Rome         259 

of  this  realm  in  peace,  unity,  and  tranquillity,  from  ravin  and 
spoil,  ensuing  much  the  old  ancient  customs  of  this  realm  in  that 
behalf:  not  minding  to  seek  for  any  relief,  succors,  or  remedies, 
for  any  worldly  things  or  human  laws  in  any  cause  of  necessity, 
but  within  this  realm,  at  the  hands  of  his  Highness,  his  heirs  and 
successors,  which  had  and  ought  to  have  an  imperial  power  and 
authority  in  the  same,  and  not  obliged  in  any  worldly  causes  to 
any  other  superior." 

Indulgences  and  all  manner  of  privileges,  and  the  abuses  of 
them,  the  fatal  shame  of  Rome,  were  specially  ordered  to  be  re- 
formed by  the  king  in  council.  But  the  good  that  this  act  wrought 
was  far  outweighed  by  the  evil.  The  true  meaning  and  intent 
of  it  all  was  contained  in  the  clauses  by  which  all  the  exempt 
abbeys  and  monasteries  were  placed  at  the  mercy  of  the  king. 
The  act,  as  we  have  seen,  transferred  a  great  deal  of  the  spiritual 
jurisdiction  usurped  by  the  pope  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 
It  might  be  supposed  that  it  would  have  transferred  to  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  among  the  rest,  that  important  part  of 
the  pope's  spiritual  jurisdiction  which  related  to  the  religious 
houses. 

There  were  religious  houses,  abbeys,  priories,  colleges,  and 
hospitals  which  were  exempt  from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Eng- 
lish primate  or  any  of  his  suffragans.  They  might  not  be  visited 
by  him,  the  election  of  their  officers  required  no  confirmation  from 
him,  their  privileges  and  liberties  were  neither  granted  nor  con- 
firmed by  his  authority.  They  were  dependent  on  the  pope  in 
regimen ;  and  some  of  them  —  the  various  sorts  of  friars  —  were 
associated  in  congregations  which  held  their  assemblies  out  of 
the  realm.  There  had  been  struggles  in  all  times  between  these 
exempt  communities  and  the  ordinaries  of  the  Church  of  England ; 
and  now  that  the  authority  of  their  foreign  superior  was  being  taken 
away,  it  seemed  the  proper  thing  to  place  them  under  the  control 
of  the  English  primates  and  bishops. 

Instead  of  which,  there  was  a  provision  made  that  neither  "the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  nor  any  other  person  or  persons," 
should  have  power  to  "visit  or  vex"  them.  That  dangerous  juris- 
diction was  to  be  intrusted  to  the  tenderer  hands  of  the  king,  and 
of  such  persons  as  the  king  might  appoint  by  commission  under 
the  great  seal.  The  confidence  which  his  Parliament  reposed  in 
the  king  was  indeed  visibly  increasing.  The  servile  spirit  which 
soon  afterwards  surrendered  the  safety  of  the  subject  by  the  act 
about  verbal  treason,  and  betrayed  the  constitution  itself  in  the 


260  English  Historians 

act  of  proclamations,  was  manifested  almost  as  strikingly  in  this 
act  also.  With  the  humility  of  a  Roman  senate  towards  a  Roman 
emperor,  the  Parliament  of  England  ordained  that  if  the  king 
wished  their  act  to  take  effect  earlier  than  they  had  fixed,  or  if 
he  chose  to  annul  the  whole  or  part  of  it  before  it  took  effect,  he 
might  issue  his  letters  patent  in  those  behalfs. 

§  4.   The  Act  for  the  Submission  of  the  Clergy  and  Restraint  of 

Appeals 

The  submission  of  the  clergy  had  been  already  extorted  from 
convocation  under  the  severe  pressure  of  tyranny,  and  appeals 
to  Rome  had  been  already  abrogated  in  order  to  deprive  the 
dowager-princess  of  her  last  resource.  To  invest  the  one  with  the 
force  of  statute,  to  confirm  the  other  by  a  new  enactment,  and 
join  the  two  together  in  a  single  act  of  Parliament,  was  to  raise 
a  legislative  monument  which  should  eternally  proclaim  the  causes 
and  the  nature  of  the  English  Reformation.  .  .  . 

This  was  the  "act  for  the  submission  of  the  clergy,  and  restraint 
of  appeals."  It  was  ordained  that  the  clergy,  according  to  their 
submission,  were  neither  to  execute  their  old  canons  or  constitutions 
nor  make  new  ones,  without  the  assent  and  license  of  the  king, 
on  pain  of  imprisonment  and  fine  at  the  royal  pleasure ;  that  their 
convocations  were  only  to  be  assembled  by  the  authority  of  the 
king's  writ;  that  the  king  should  have  power  to  nominate  two 
and  thirty  persons,  sixteen  of  the  spirituality  and  sixteen  of  the 
temporalty,  to  revise  the  canons,  ordinances,  and  constitutions 
provincial;  and  that  in  the  meantime  such  of  the  canons  which 
were  not  contrariant  to  the  laws  of  the  realm,  nor  prejudicial  to 
the  prerogative  royal,  should  still  be  used  and  executed  as  here- 
tofore. 

The  flame  of  controversy  has  raged  round  every  letter  of  this 
celebrated  act :  how  far  it  forbade  or  permitted  the  clergy  to  move, 
to  treat,  to  debate,  or  to  legislate  in  their  assemblies;  whether  it 
respected  one  kind  of  convocation  or  more ;  and  whether  there  were 
more  than  one  kind  of  convocation  which  it  could  respect :  these 
and  other  questions  have  been  disputed  with  more  than  the  usual 
acrimony  of  theological  warfare,  and  with  incredible  closeness 
of  research.  But  for  the  purposes  of  history  it  is  enough  to  ob- 
serve that  the  intention  of  the  act  was  to  discourage  the  clergy 
from  debating,  not  less  clearly  than  to  forbid  them  to  make  new 
ecclesiastical  laws  without  the  king.  They  could  never  be  certain 


Parliament  and  the  Breach  with   Rome       261 

at  what  point  of  their  proceedings  the  king's  authority  and  license 
might  be  needful ;  how  far  they  might  go  without  it ;  what  kind  of 
matter  might  require  it  and  what  not.  All  was  left  undetermined ; 
and  if  they  attempted  anything  whatever,  they  might  find  them- 
selves clapped  into  prison  and  heavily  fined,  as  having  fallen  into 
a  prcemunire. 

As  for  the  plan  of  examining  and  revising  the  old  canons  and 
constitutions  by  a  commission  of  thirty-two  persons,  this  was  never 
carried  out.  The  king  seems  indeed  to  have  nominated  them ; 
but  he  took  no  further  notice  of  them  or  their  work;  and  the 
ecclesiastical  laws  meantime  remained  in  abeyance.  It  is  true 
indeed  that  there  was  a  provision  added  to  the  act,  that  those  canons 
which  were  not  contrariant  to  the  laws  of  the  realm  and  the  pre- 
rogative of  the  king  should  be  executed  as  heretofore,  until  the 
proposed  revision  should  be  made;  but  who  was  to  determine 
which  of  the  canons  were  meant?  And  who  was  to  define  a 
prerogative  royal  which  was  growing  greater  every  day?  The 
clergy  might  perhaps  have  shown  that  none  of  their  canons  were 
repugnant  to  the  laws  of  the  realm,  if  it  had  ever  come  to  that; 
but  they  could  never  have  been  safe  against  the  royal  prerogative. 
We  find  the  bishops,  in  their  uncertainty  after  the  passing  of  the 
act,  taking  out  licenses  for  the  execution  of  their  functions  as  or- 
dinaries of  the  Church.  We  shall  find  this  commission  of  thirty- 
two  again  and  again  promoted  by  act  of  Parliament  in  the  course 
of  the  Reformation,  and  again  and  again  brought  to  naught. 
What  came  of  it  eventually  will  be  seen  in  due  time.  With  regard 
to  appeals,  the  act  confirmed  the  measure  of  the  year  before  in 
transferring  them  from  Rome  to  Canterbury  and  the  other  arch- 
sees  of  England ;  but  it  gave  a  further  and  final  appeal  from  the 
archbishops  into  the  court  of  chancery.  And  it  so  happened  that 
monasteries  and  other  places  exempt  were  here  again  excepted 
from  the  general  tenor  of  the  law.  The  appeals  from  all  such 
places  which  were  wont  to  be  made  to  Rome  were  ordered  not 
to  be  made  to  the  archbishops,  but  immediately  into  chancery. 
Thus  was  the  axe  laid  to  the  root  of  the  monastic  tree.  .  .  . 

§  5.    The  King  Made  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church 

After  an  unusually  short  interval  the  houses  of  Parliament 
assembled  again  in  the  beginning  of  November.  Their  first  act 
was  to  declare  that  the  king  ought  to  have  the  title  and  style  of 
supreme  head  of  the  Church  of  England.  The  brief  declaration 


262  English   Historians 

in  which  this  was  embodied  was  of  little  more  than  formal  impor- 
tance. It  neither  made,  nor  professed  to  make,  any  change  in 
the  constitution.  The  king  was  already  supreme  head  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  the  act  began  by  saying  that  he  was  so 
already.  The  king  had  been  already  acknowledged  by  the  clergy 
of  the  realm  in  their  convocations  to  be  the  supreme  head  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  the  act  went  on  to  rehearse  that  the  clergy 
had  acknowledged  him  already.  But  it  seemed  desirable  "for 
increase  of  virtue  in  Christ's  religion,  and  to  repress  and  extirpe 
all  errors,  heresies,  and  other  enormities  and  abuses,"  to  authorize 
him  to  have  the  title  and  "all  honors,  dignities,  preeminences, 
jurisdictions,  privileges,  authorities,  immunities,  profits,  and 
commodities"  belonging  thereto. 

The  honors  and  dignities,  it  may  be  observed,  he  had  already, 
because  he  was  supreme  head;  the  jurisdictions,  privileges,  au- 
thorities, and  immunities  which  were  usurped  by  foreign  power 
had  already  been  restored  severally;  and  with  them  the  profits 
and  commodities  which  pertained  to  the  same  high  office  of  right. 
But  the  houses  of  Parliament  meant  to  augment  very  largely 
the  profits  and  commodities,  if  they  added  nothing  to  the  dignity 
of  the  head  of  the  realm  by  a  mere  declaration  of  his  title.  The 
king,  they  added,  was  to  have  power  and  authority  "to  visit  and 
reform  errors,  heresies,  contempts,  and  offences."  He  had  such 
power  already  as  the  supreme  ordinary,  and  could  have  exercised 
it  at  any  time  through  his  spiritual  officers ;  and  in  a  constitutional 
point  of  view  the  clause  which  thus  empowered  him  was  merely 
declaratory,  like  the  other  parts  of  the  act.  But  it  was  a  declara- 
tion made  with  a  terrible  intention.  He  took  the  advantage  it 
was  meant  to  afford,  and  proceeded  to  ruin  the  monasteries,  and 
half  ruin  the  Church,  for  his  own  profits  and  commodities. 

§  6.   Disposition  o]  the  Firstjruits 

It  has  been  seen  that  when  the  clergy,  two  years  before,  acknowl- 
edged the  king  for  their  supreme  head,  they  represented  the  dis- 
tress to  which  they  were  reduced  by  the  papal  exactions  of  annates, 
or  firstfruits,  and  petitioned  him  for  the  abolition  of  these  op- 
pressive impositions.  Now  that  the  lords  and  commons  in  their 
turn  acknowledged  the  king  for  their  supreme  head,  they  cele- 
brated the  occasion  by  annexing  the  firstfruits  of  all  spiritual 
promotions  to  the  crown.  It  might  have  seemed  proper,  since 
the  pope  was  gone,  that  his  exactions  should  go  after  him.  But  the 


Parliament  and  the  Breach  with  Rome       263 

profits  and  commodities  of  the  supreme  head  were  to  be  aug- 
mented. .  .  . 

The  penalty  for  default  of  payment  of  the  tenths  was  depriva- 
tion. The  charge  of  collecting  them  was  thrown  upon  the  bishops. 
This  seemed  a  ready  mode  of  discharging  the  inestimable  obliga- 
tions which  his  Majesty's  faithful  subjects  assembled  owned  so 
copiously.  Some  grains  of  mercy  were  added.  No  firstfruits 
were  to  be  taken  from  a  living  of  less  than  eight  marks  a  year, 
unless  the  incumbent  remained  in  it  above  three  years  from  his 
presentation ;  but  if  he  lived  in  it  so  long  as  that,  firstfruits  were 
to  be  levied.  The  fifth  part  of  the  enormous  fine  which  the  clergy 
had  incurred  under  the  prasmunire  two  years  before  was  remitted, 
in  consideration  of  the  yearly  payments  which  they  were  hence- 
forth required  to  make.  To  prevent  the  act  from  cutting  both 
ways,  another  act  was  passed.  There  were  many  lands  belong- 
ing to  spiritual  owners  which  were  let,  it  might  be,  to  temporal 
persons.  Therefore,  "for  certain  reasonable  and  urgent  considera- 
tions moving  the  king's  high  court  of  Parliament,"  it  was  ordained 
that  the  farmers  or  lessees  of  such  lands  should  not  be  liable  to 
pay  firstfruits  or  tenths  on  them;  but  that  the  payment  should 
fall  on  the  spiritual  owners. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Pollard,  Henry  VIII,  chap,  vii  on  the  "Origin  of  the  Divorce,"  chap, 
viii  on  the  "  Pope's  Dilemma,"  and  the  succeeding  chapters  on  the  work  of 
the  "  Reformation  Parliament."     Gairdner,  The  Origin  of  the  Divorce,  in  the  - 
English  Historical  Review,  Vols.  XI  and  XII.     Lingard,  History  of  England,  ' 
Vol.  V,  chaps,  i-iv,  an  old  but  useful  work  by  a  Catholic  historian.     Ranke, 
History  of  England  Especially  in  the  Seventeenth  Century,  Vol.  I,  pp.  91  ff. 
The  Cambridge  Modern  History,  Vol.  I,  chap,  xiii  on  Henry  VIII. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  MAINTENANCE  OF  THE  NEW   ESTABLISHMENT 

THERE  is,  perhaps,  no  page  in  English  history  more  tragical  than 
that  on  which  is  recorded  the  trial  and  execution  of  Fisher  and 
More  and  those  who  could  not  accept  the  new  order  established 
by  the  Reformation  Parliament.  Even  the  heroic  efforts  of  Mr. 
Froude  to  justify  the  new  policy  on  grounds  of  state,  if  regarded 
as  successful,  cannot  obscure  the  real  character  of  the  men  who 
helped  to  make  those  great  historical  events.  The  subsequent 
destruction  of  the  monasteries  and  peculiar  disposal  of  the  lands 
wrested  from  the  religious  houses  give  us  an  insight  into  the 
spirit  and  methods  employed  by  Henry  VIII  and  his  servants. 
A  brief  account  of  this  period  by  a  distinguished  scholar  is  to 
be  found  in  Gairdner,  History  of  the  English  Church  in  the 
Sixteenth  Century.  • 

§  i.   The  Execution  oj  the  Charterhouse  Monks1 

On  January  15,  1535,  an  order  was  made  in  council  that  the 
title  "on  earth  supreme  head  of  the  Church  of  England  "  should 
be  added  to  the  king's  style.  It  was  a  title  that  shocked  deeply 
religious  minds  —  even  Luther  in  Germany  could  not  stomach  it. 
But,  as  the  king  himself  always  declared,  it  conveyed  no  new  powers 
and  he  was  right.  A  temporal  sovereign  must  always  be  supreme 
even  over  the  Church  within  his  kingdom.  How  far  he  may 
abuse  his  powers,  is  another  question. 

Thomas  Cromwell,  who  for  some  months  had  been  the  king's 
chief  secretary  and  master  of  the  rolls,  on  January  21  received  a 
commission  for  a  general  visitation  of  the  churches,  monasteries, 
and  clergy  throughout  the  kingdom.  On  the  ^oth  commissions 

1  Gairdner,  A  History  of  the  Church  oj  England  in  the  Sixteenth  Century, 
chap.  ix.  By  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  Publishers. 

264 


The   Maintenance  of  the  New  Establishment     265 

were  issued  for  the  different  parts  of  the  kingdom  for  a  general 
valuation  of  benefices,  that  they  might  be  taxed  for  firstfruits 
and  tenths.  The  bishops  were  also  compelled  to  surrender  their 
bulls  from  Rome,  and  in  the  course  of  the  next  few  months  express 
renunciations  of  papal  jurisdiction  were  obtained  from  each  under 
their  several  seals. 

To  strengthen  his  hands,  Cromwell  was  appointed  the  king's 
vicar-general  or  vicegerent  in  spiritual  things,  and  Cranmer  and 
the  bishops  took  their  orders  from  him,  especially  about  having 
the  king's  supremacy  preached  within  their  dioceses.  The  greater 
part  of  the  clergy  and  bishops  resigned  themselves  to  the  new  state 
of  affairs,  which  many  thought  so  forced  and  artificial  that  it  could 
not  possibly  last  long.  But  the  expression  even  of  this  belief 
was  dangerous,  and  the  clergy  stood  in  dread  of  informers.  In 
April,  orders  were  sent  out  for  the  arrest  of  all  who  maintained 
"the  Bishop  of  Rome's  "  jurisdiction  or  prayed  for  him  in  the  pul- 
pit as  pope ;  and  in  the  same  month  the  new  acts  of  supremacy  and 
succession  were  first  brought  to  bear  on  a  little  company  composed 
mainly  of  Charterhouse  monks,  accused  of  treason.  Their 
names  were  John  Houghton,  prior  of  the  London  Charterhouse, 
Augustine  Webster  and  Robert  Lawrence,  heads  of  the  two  Char- 
terhouses of  Axholme  in  Lincolnshire  and  Beval  in  Notts;  Dr. 
Richard  Reynolds  of  the  Bridgettine  monastery  of  Sion,  and 
John  Hale,  vicar  of  Isleworth.  Along  with  these  was  also  accused 
a  young  priest,  named  Robert  Feron  of  Teddington,  who  saved 
his  skin  and  earned  a  pardon  after  condemnation  by  revealing 
conversations  between  himself  and  Hale.  In  these  private  utter- 
ances, Hale  had  spoken  of  the  king  as  a  cruel  tyrant  and  robber 
of  the  commonwealth  and  commented  on  his  gross  profligacy, 
of  which  his  second  marriage  was  the  shameful  consummation. 
He  was  compelled  to  ask  forgiveness  for  what  he  had  said  both 
of  the  king  and  Queen  Anne,  and  could  only  plead  in  excuse  that 
he  had  uttered  the  scandals  against  the  king  on  information  given 
him  by  another  person.  He  gave  the  name  of  his  informant, 
who  was  in  fact  one  of  his  own  accusers,  but  it  does  not  appear  that 
the  latter  was  made  to  suffer  for  statements  which,  flagrant  as  they 
were,  no  doubt  were  strictly  true. 

Prior  Houghton,  as  we  have  seen,  had  already  been  in  the  Tower, 
and  had  obtained  his  release  on  terms  which  he  was  convinced 
would  only  be  held  sufficient  for  a  time.  The  new  acts  passed  in 
November,  he  knew  well,  would  bring  further  trials,  and  while  he 
and  his  convent  were  strengthening  themselves  against  evil  to 


266  English  Historians 

come,  they  received  as  guests  the  two  priors  from  the  country, 
Lawrence  and  Webster,  each  of  whom  had  come  up  independently 
to  visit  the  brethren  in  London.  They  and  Prior  Houghton 
took  counsel  together  on  the  situation  and  resolved  to  forestall 
the  coming  of  the  king's  commissioners  to  the  monastery  by  a 
visit  to  Cromwell  to  urge  that  the  brethren  should  not  be  pressed 
for  any  further  oaths.  Needless  to  say  such  persuasions  were 
in  vain,  and  the  two  country  priors  only  involved  themselves 
prematurely  in  the  dangers  of  their  London  brethren.  On  April 
20  they  appeared  before  Cromwell  at  the  rolls,  and  were  asked 
whether  they  would  obey  the  king  as  the  supreme  head  of  the  Church 
of  England.  They  replied  that  they  could  not  acknowledge  him 
as  such  and  were  forthwith  sent  to  the  Tower,  where  they  and  Prior 
Houghton  and  Dr.  Reynolds  were  visited  six  days  later  by  Crom- 
well and  other  councillors  to  induce  them  to  comply  with  the  act, 
but  they  still  refused.  On  the  28th  they  were  all,  including  Hale 
and  Feron,  brought  to  trial  at  Westminster,  before  a  special  com- 
mission with  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  at  the  head.  Dr.  Reynolds 
made  a  singularly  bold  and  able  defence.  Next  day,  after  much 
solicitation  made  to  them  to  recant,  they  were  found  guilty  and 
the  dreadful  sentence  for  treason  was  passed  upon  them.  On 
May  4  it  was  carried  out  with  even  more  than  usual  brutality,  the 
men  being  ripped  up  in  each  other's  presence,  their  arms  torn  off, 
and  their  hearts  rubbed  upon  their  mouths  and  faces. 

The  world  was  horrified.  The  crime  was  a  new  one,  and  besides 
the  barbarity  of  the  execution  there  was  an  additional  novelty 
in  the  fact  that  priests  were  made  to  expiate  a  civil  crime  without 
having  been  previously  degraded  from  the  priesthood.  No  such 
feeling  was  aroused  when  a  month  later  (on  June  4)  two  Dutch 
Anabaptists,  a  man  and  a  woman,  were  burned  at  Smithfield,  and 
twelve  others  were  despatched  to  meet  a  like  fate  in  other  towns. 
That  sect  had  for  more  than  a  year  occasioned  much  trouble  at 
Munster,  where  they  were  even  now  besieged  by  their  bishop. 
Their  views,  which,  beside  rebaptism  and  a  good  deal  of  strange 
theology,  included  also  community  of  goods,  had  been  largely 
disseminated  in  Westphalia  and  Holland,  and  had  now  overflowed 
into  England.  Twenty-five  of  these  Dutch  heretics,  nineteen 
men  and  six  women,  were  examined  in  St.  Paul's  Church  on  May 
25,  and  fourteen  of  them  were  condemned  with  the  results  just 
stated.  The  others  were  reconciled  to  the  Church  and  sent 
back  to  the  Low  Countries  to  be  dealt  with  as  Mary  of  Hun- 
gary saw  fit. 


The  Maintenance  of  the  New  Establishment     267 


§  2.   Fisher  and  More 

But  the  fate  of  such  victims  seems  almost  unimportant  com- 
pared with  the  cruelties  inflicted  on  the  most  noble  of  the  king's 
own  subjects.  Other  prisoners  in  the  Tower  were  now  informed 
that  they  must  swear  to  the  recent  statutes  to  avoid  the  fate  of 
the  Carthusians.  These  were  Bishop  Fisher  and  Sir  Thomas 
More,  Dr.  Nicholas  Wilson,  once  the  king's  confessor,  Thomas 
Abell,  who  had  been  chaplain  to  Queen  Catherine,  and  Richard 
Fetherstone,  the  Princess  Mary's  schoolmaster.  Six  weeks  were 
given  them  to  make  up  their  minds,  but  they  all  replied  that  they 
were  ready  to  die  at  once  rather  than  acknowledge  the  king's 
supremacy.  Meanwhile  the  news  came  to  England  that  on  May 
20  Pope  Paul  III  had  made  Bishop  Fisher  a  cardinal ;  at  which 
Henry  was  more  enraged  than  ever,  and  declared  that  he  would 
send  his  head  to  Rome  to  receive  the  hat. 

Cromwell,  with  some  others  of  the  council,  had  already  paid  a 
visit  to  Fisher  in  the  Tower  on  May  7  to  examine  him  on  certain 
subjects,  the  first  of  which  was  the  king's  supremacy.  Cromwell 
read  to  him  a  copy  of  the  act,  but  he  replied  that  he  could  not  agree 
to  take  the  king  as  supreme  head  of  the  Church.  Cromwell 
then  read  to  him  another  act,  making  it  treason  to  deny  the  su- 
premacy; but  he  was  already  aware  of  its  contents.  In  fact,  he 
had  been  informed  in  the  beginning  of  February  that  a  new  statute 
had  just  come  into  operation  (the  date  February  i  was  fixed  in 
the  act  itself)  by  which  a  number  of  new  offences  had  been  created 
treason,  and,  among  other  things,  any  attempt  by  word  or  writing 
to  deprive  the  king  or  queen  of  any  of  their  titles.  This,  of  course, 
included  the  title  of  "supreme  head"  and  it  is  a  fact  that  even 
that  subservient  House  of  Commons  refused  to  pass  the  bill 
without  inserting  the  word  maliciously,  in  the  hope,  apparently, 
that  inoffensive  persons  who  objected  to  the  new  title  would  be 
shielded  from  the  rigor  of  the  law.  But  Sir  Thomas  More  warned 
his  fellow-prisoner  Fisher  not  to  attach  too  much  importance  to 
the  insertion  of  this  word.  He  knew  too  well  the  way  in  which 
laws  regarding  treason  were  construed  to  believe  that  it  afforded 
the  smallest  protection  to  the  accused. 

As  Rome  was  bent  on  rewarding  Bishop  Fisher  for  disowning 
royal  supremacy,  Henry  saw  that  mere  threats  would  be  insuffi- 
cient to  make  his  new  title  respected.  On  June  14  four  clergy- 
men of  the  king's  council,  with  a  notary  and  some  other  officials, 


268  English  Historians 

visited  Fisher  and  More  separately  in  the  Tower  and  took 
down  their  answers  to  three  interrogatories  prepared  beforehand. 
These  were,  —  whether  they  would  obey  the  king  as  head  of  the 
church,  acknowledge  the  validity  of  his  marriage  with  Anne  and 
the  invalidity  of  that  with  Catherine,  and  why  they  would  not 
answer  explicitly.  More  declined  to  answer  any  of  these  questions. 
Fisher  stood  by  his  refusal  of  the  supremacy,  which  he  offered  to 
justify  more  fully;  but  as  to  the  king's  marriages,  he  could  only 
promise  to  obey  and  swear  to  the  act  of  succession  without  saying 
more. 

On  June  n  an  indictment  was  found  against  Bishop  Fisher 
and  three  of  the  monks  of  the  London  Charterhouse,  whom  the 
fate  of  their  prior  had  not  terrified  into  submission.  The  names 
of  these  brethren  were  Humphrey  Middlemore,  William  Exmewe, 
and  our  friend,  Sebastian  Newdigate.  The  clerk  of  the  council, 
Thomas  Bedyll,  had  visited  the  Charterhouse  on  the  very  day 
of  the  prior's  execution,  and  after  a  long  discussion  had  left  some 
books  of  his  own  and  others'  composition  against  the  pope's 
primacy.  These  the  brethren  returned  next  day  without  comment, 
and  afterwards  owned  that  they  saw  nothing  in  them  to  alter  their 
opinions.  Some  of  the  other  brethren,  perhaps,  might  not  be  so 
steadfast,  and  another  visitor,  John  Whalley,  conceived  that  a 
little  preaching  might  bring  them  over.  But  the  three  were  sum- 
moned to  Stepney  on  May  25  apparently  before  Cromwell  and 
flatly  refused  to  accept  the  king's  supremacy.  For  this  they  re- 
ceived the  sentence  as  traitors,  and  on  the  igth  they  were  hanged 
and  quartered  at  Tyburn.  Meanwhile  on  the  xyth  the  venerable 
Bishop  Fisher  was  brought  to  his  trial  at  Westminster  and  received 
sentence  under  the  same  law.  On  the  22nd  he  was  beheaded  on 
Tower  Hill  and  buried  in  the  neighboring  church  of  All  Hallows 
Barking.  The  king  apparently  thought  it  not  wise  to  let  him  be 
quartered  or  disembowelled,  for  the  sympathy  of  the  people  with 
the  sufferer  was  unmistakable. 

More's  time  soon  followed.  He  was  brought  to  his  trial  on 
July  i.  His  caution  in  persistently  refusing  to  answer  dangerous 
questions  did  not  serve  to  protect  him.  He  had  never  expressly 
denied  the  king's  supremacy,  and  had  always  avoided  the  subject, 
but  it  was  found  that  he  had  sent  letters  to  Fisher  in  prison  com- 
paring the  act  of  Parliament  to  a  two-edged  sword,  and  Fisher 
had  used  the  same  comparison  when  examined  by  the  lord  chan- 
cellor in  the  Tower.  If  a  man  answered  one  way,  this  two-edged 
sword  would  confound  his  soul;  if  the  other  way,  it  would  confound 


The   Maintenance  of  the   New   Establishment     269 

his  body.  What  this  meant  was  pretty  plain.  Other  things  were 
also  found  out  about  their  private  communications,  tending  to 
involve  More  in  Fisher's  treason;  and  the  better  to  insure  a  con- 
viction, Rich,  the  solicitor-general,  had  visited  him  in  the  Tower, 
and  drawn  him  into  a  conversation  about  the  authority  of  acts  of 
Parliament  to  show  that  he  recognized  some  limitation  in  obedience 
to  them.  This  was  no  doubt  the  case.  But  the  account  of  their 
conversation  given  by  Rich  was  so  entirely  false,  that  More  not 
only  corrected  it  by  giving  the  true  story,  but  charged  Rich  with 
perjury  in  open  court.  He  conducted  his  own  defence  with  all 
the  astuteness  that  might  have  been  expected  in  such  an  able 
lawyer;  but  he  was  found  guilty  under  the  new  law.  Then,  his 
tongue  being  loosed,  he  spoke  his  mind  freely,  declaring  that  he 
had  studied  the  subject  of  the  statute  for  seven  years,  and  could 
find  no  good  authority  to  maintain  that  a  temporal  man  might  be 
the  head  of  a  spirituality.  On  this  he  was  interrupted  by  the  chan- 
cellor, and  a  conversation  followed  in  court  in  which  the  Duke  of 
Norfolk  also  took  part.  But  More  certainly  held  his  own,  and 
ended  by  hoping  that  as  St.  Paul  and  St.  Stephen  whom  Paul 
persecuted  were  now  friends  in  heaven,  it  might  be  the  same  with 
him  and  his  judges.  No  man  ever  met  an  unjust  doom  in  a  more 
admirable  spirit. 

He  was  conveyed  to  the  Tower,  where  on  the  wharf  his  favorite 
daughter,  Margaret  Roper,  broke  through  the  line  of  guards  and 
took  a  last  embrace  of  her  father.  The  spectators  were  surprised 
and  spellbound.  When  More  found  breath  to  speak,  he  bade  her 
have  patience,  for  she  knew  his  mind.  From  his  dungeon  after- 
wards he  wrote  to  her  with  a  coal,  the  only  writing  instrument 
he  was  allowed :  "  Dear  Meg.  I  never  liked  your  manner  towards 
me  better  than  when  you  kissed  me  last.  For  I  like  when  daugh- 
terly love  and  dear  charity  hath  no  leisure  to  look  to  worldly  cour- 
tesy." On  July  6  he  was  beheaded  on  Tower  Hill.  .  .  . 

§  3.    Visitations  of  the  Monasteries 

The  Church  of  England  was  thus  left  under  the  absolute  con- 
trol of  Henry,  so  far  as  its  external  polity  was  concerned.  A  royal 
visitation  of  the  churches  and  monasteries  had  been  contemplated 
for  some  time,  and  Cromwell  had  been  already  named  in  January 
as  the  instrument  by  which  it  should  be  effected.  But  no  particular 
steps  were  taken  to  carry  out  the  idea  until  the  summer.  The 
bishops  stood  in  the  way,  many  of  whom  were  holding  their  own 


270  English  Historians 

visitations  at  the  time,  and  were  not  inclined  to  give  up  the  last 
vestige  of  their  independence.  In  June  it  was  suggested  to  Crom- 
well by  Dr.  Richard  Layton,  one  of  the  clerks  of  the  council  (who 
had  examined  More  and  Fisher  in  the  Tower)  that  he  and  a  certain 
Dr.  Thomas  Legh  (who  had  examined  one  of  Fislur's  servants) 
might  be  appointed  his  commissaries  for  the  visitation  of  the  north 
country  from  the  diocese  of  Lincoln  to  the  borders  of  Scotland, 
for  they  had  friends  everywhere  in  those  parts  who  would  enable 
them  to  detect  abuses.  This  was  not  conceded  at  once;  but  in 
July,  having  accompanied  Cromwell  and  the  court  into  Gloucester- 
shire, Layton  was  allowed  to  make  a  beginning  in  the  visitation 
of  monasteries  only,  taking  those  in  that  district  first,  while  his 
friend,  Dr.  Legh  started  on  a  similar  mission  at  Worcester, 
accompanied  by  a  notary  named  John  Ap  Rice.  The  methods 
of  these  two  visitors  differed  somewhat,  and  Legh  actually  visited 
the  monastery  of  Bruton  after  Layton  had  visited  it  already;  but 
neither  of  them  seems  to  have  been  very  scrupulous,  and  though 
abuses  no  doubt  existed  in  some  monasteries,  it  is  impossible 
to  suppose  they  were  so  flagrant  or  so  general  as  their  reports 
imply. 

From  Bath  and  Bristol  Layton  proceeded  to  Oxford,  where  he 
instituted  new  lectures,  abolished  the  study  of  canon  law,  and 
committed  shameful  havoc  in  the  destruction  of  the  works  of  Duns 
Scotus.  He  then  passed  on  into  Surrey,  Sussex,  and  Kent,  where 
he  caused  two  small  monasteries  at  Folkestone  and  Dover  to  sur- 
render, and  returned  towards  the  end  of  the  year  to  London,  in 
the  neighborhood  of  which  he  and  Bedyll  did  their  best  to  coerce 
the  remaining  brethren  of  Sion  into  accepting  the  king's  new  title. 
His  colleague,  Legh,  meanwhile  passed  through  Wiltshire,  Hamp- 
shire, Berkshire,  Surrey,  and  from  thence  by  Bedfordshire  to 
Cambridge  where,  in  October,  he  visited  the  university  (of  which 
Cromwell  had  just  been  made  chancellor  in  the  room  of  Bishop 
Fisher),  leaving  a  set  of  injunctions  for  its  future  government. 

Both  visitors  had  professed  to  discover  a  great  amount  of  foul- 
ness in  most  of  the  monasteries  they  visited,  besides  superstitious 
relics.  But  Legh  was  foremost  in  a  policy  of  laying  down  severe 
regulations  for  the  monks,  binding  them  by  antiquated  restric- 
tions which  it  had  long  been  impossible  to  maintain.  And  this 
policy,  he  frankly  told  Cromwell  in  his  letters,  would  be  useful 
in  making  monks  sue  to  him  for  dispensations  from  rules  which, 
even  in  the  interest  of  the  houses  themselves,  required  occasionally 
to  be  set  aside.  But  he  and  his  colleague,  John  Ap  Rice,  struck  out 


The   Maintenance  of  the  New   Establishment     271 

a  still  bolder  course,  and  suggested  to  Cromwell  that  as  the  bishops 
disliked  interference  with  their  visitations,  they  should  be  com- 
pelled to  acknowledge  that  they  held  their  jurisdiction  merely  from 
the  king,  who  was  therefore  free  to  resume  it  into  his  own  hands ; 
for  if  they  were  allowed  to  exercise  it  without  interruption,  they 
would  do  so  according  to  the  canon  law  which  was  now  abolished. 
This  advice  was  taken,  and  the  bishops  in  the  beginning  of  October 
received  orders  to  suspend  their  visitations  pending  the  royal 
visitation  to  be  held  under  the  direction  of  Cromwell  as  vicar- 
general. 

Legh  and  Layton,  then,  having  traversed  by  different  routes 
a  large  part  of  the  south  of  England,  met  before  the  end  of  the 
year  at  Lichfield  and  visited  Yorkshire  and  the  northern  monas- 
teries in  company.  Here,  as  in  the  south,  their  objects  were  to 
inquire  partly  as  to  the  revenue  of  the  houses,  and  how  far  they 
were  burdened  with  debt,  partly  as  to  pilgrimages,  relics,  and 
superstitions,  but  most  of  all  as  to  the  immoralities  practised  by 
the  inmates.  They  had  transmitted  piecemeal  reports  of  what 
they  called  their  comperta  in  the  southern  houses  to  Cromwell. 
For  the  province  of  York  and  the  bishopric  of  Coventry  and  Lich- 
field they  made  up  a  compendium  compertorum  of  the  most  extraor- 
dinary foulness,  similar  to  one  drawn  up  by  Ap  Rice  from  the  records 
of  Legh's  visitation  for  the  diocese  of  Norwich.  If  we  are  to  be- 
lieve these  "comperts"  (so  the  word  was  Anglicized  in  a  subse- 
quent act  of  Parliament),  a  large  proportion  of  the  monasteries 
of  England  were  little  better  than  brothels.  There  were  even  nuns 
who  had  had  children,  and  in  several  instances  by  priests.  Some 
of  these  cases  may  be  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  ladies  had 
found  retreats  in  religious  houses  after  personal  misfortune  and 
disgrace,  and  no  doubt  there  were  other  scandals  here  and  there. 
But  there  are  grave  reasons  for  suspecting  the  whole  of  these 
"comperts"  to  be  a  gross  exaggeration.  Nor  can  we  well  believe 
that  visitors  cared  much  about  the  truth,  who  did  their  work  so 
hurriedly.  Certain  it  is  that  many  of  the  houses  which  stood 
worst  in  their  reports  were  afterwards  declared  to  bear  a  fair 
character  by  gentlemen  .of  the  neighborhood  specially  commis- 
sioned to  report  on  them  for  other  purposes.  Moreover,  we  know 
that  the  visitors'  reports  to  Cromwell  were  secret  and  had  a  dis- 
tinct object  in  view,  to  be  mentioned  presently. 

Cromwell  himself  had  conducted  some  visitations  personally 
while  travelling  about  with  the  king  in  the  autumn  of  1535.  He 
had  made  inventories  of  the  goods  of  such  monasteries  as  came 


272  English   Historians 

in  his  way,  and  had  turned  out  all  monks  or  nuns  who  had 
made  their  profession  before  they  were  twenty-five,  letting  the 
rest  know  that  they  were  free  either  to  go  or  remain,  as  a  very 
rigorous  reformation  was  at  hand.  Measures  like  these,  however, 
did  not  tend  to  improve  the  discipline  of  the  monasteries,  which 
the  royal  visitation  altogether  was  admirably  calculated  to  destroy, 
encouraging  monks  to  turn  informers,  while  heads  of  houses  were 
harassed  in  a  way  to  make  them  weary  of  their  charge  and  anxious 
to  surrender. 

§  4.    The  Dissolution  oj  the  Smaller  Monasteries 

Legh  and  Layton  concluded  their  work  in  February,  1536, 
when  Henry's  "Long  Parliament"  had  met  again  for  its  last  ses- 
sion. The  principal  measure  laid  before  it  was  one  for  the  dis- 
solution of  monasteries  under  £200  a  year  in  value.  By  what 
pressure  the  consent  of  the  two  houses  was  obtained  to  this  meas- 
ure it  might  be  rash  to  affirm,  although  it  is  certain  that  the  king 
had  intended  to  forbid  the  attendance  of  the  abbots  this  session, 
and  there  is  a  remarkable  tradition  recorded  by  Spelman  of  a  royal 
threat  which  intimidated  the  House  of  Commons.  But  the  words 
of  the  act  itself  are  suggestive.  The  preamble  states  that  carnal 
sin  and  abominable  living  were  usual  in  small  monasteries  with 
less  than  twelve  inmates.  So  it  is  said  the  king  had  ascertained 
by  the  "comperts"  of  his  late  visitations,  and  "by  sundry  credible 
informations,"  and  the  only  reformation  possible  was  to  suppress 
such  houses  entirely  and  transfer  the  inmates  to  large  houses, 
where  religion,  happily,  was  well  preserved.  Writers  of  a  later 
generation  speak  of  a  certain  "Black  Book"  supposed  to  have 
been  produced  in  this  Parliament,  which  contained  a  register  of 
monastic  enormities;  but  there  is  no  appearance  that  any  docu- 
ment of  the  kind  ever  existed  except  the  compendium  comperto- 
rum,  and  certainly  this,  in  which  some  of  the  largest  monasteries 
were  the  worst  defamed,  affords  no  warrant  for  the  extraordinary 
insinuation  that  vice  prevailed  invariably  where  the  numbers  fell 
below  twelve,  and  that  the  great  monasteries  were  better  regu- 
lated. So  it  is  evident  that  the  Parliament  took  the  king's  word 
as  to  the  character  of  the  disclosures,  and  passed  the  bill  because 
they  were  required  to  do  so.  Nothing  else  alleged  to  have  been 
discovered  in  the  monasteries  could  really  have  gone  before  Par- 
liament or  the  public  except  certain  vague  statements  that  im- 
moralities were  practised  in  a  large  number  of  houses. 


The  Maintenance  of  the  New  Establishment     273 


§  5.    The  Death  of  Catherine 

But  before  this  parliamentary  session  had  begun  —  before  the 
visitors  had  ended  their  labors  in  the  north,  and  while  the  king's 
ambassadors  in  Germany  were  still  discussing  theology  with  Protes- 
tant divines  —  an  event  occurred  which  made  a  sensible  change 
in  the  situation.  Catherine  of  Aragon,  after  nearly  four  years' 
separation  from  her  husband,  died  at  Kimbolton  on  January  7, 
1536.  A  pathetic  story  which  has  gained  too  much  credit  with 
historians  says  that  at  the  last  she  wrote  a  touching  letter  to  Henry, 
which  drew  tears  into  his  eyes  when  he  read  it.  Facts,  unhappily 
reported  at  the  time  in  confidential  despatches  by  Chapuys,  show 
that  the  tale  is  pure  invention.  Catherine,  for  her  part,  could 
not  have  written  such  a  letter;  for  she  had  long  been  obliged  to 
yield  to  the  painful  conviction  that  her  husband  had  become  ut- 
terly hardened  and  unscrupulous.  And  the  news  of  her  death 
gave  him  a  satisfaction  that  he  was  at  no  pains  to  conceal.  "  God 
be  praised,"  he  said;  "we  are  now  free  from  all  fear  of  war." 
Next  day  he  clothed  himself  in  yellow  and  danced  with  the  ladies 
of  his  court  like  one  mad  with  delight. 

X 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

The  great  work  on  the  dissolution  of  the  monasteries  is  Gasquet,  Henry 
VIII  and  the  English  Monasteries.  For  a  full  and  scholarly  account  of 
Cromwell  and  his  work,  consult  Merriman,  Thomas  Cromwell.  On  all  the 
points  discussed  in  the  above  extract,  compare  the  views  and  accounts  given 
by  Froude,  History  of  England,  and  Pollard,  Henry  VIII. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  ORIGIN  OF  THE  DOCTRINAL  REVOLT 

DR.  JOHN  CLARK,  in  presenting  to  the  pope  Henry  VIII's 
book  against  Luther,  doubtless  spoke  truly  when  he  declared  that 
England  "has  never  been  behind  other  nations  in  the  worship 
of  God  and  the  Christian  faith,  and  in  obedience  to  the  Roman 
Church."  In  spite  of  attempts  to  demonstrate  that  the  influence 
of  Wycliffe's  teachings  was  widespread  and  that  there  was  a  steady 
increase  of  heretical  opinion  in  England  before  the  Act  of  separa- 
tion from  the  Roman  Church,  the  evidence  so  far  adduced  has  not 
been  very  conclusive.  The  king  and  Parliament,  whether  repre- 
senting national  will  or  not,  were  just  as  anxious  to  punish  those 
who  attempted  to  bring  about  changes  in  doctrine  as  those  who 
retained  their  allegiance  to  the  pope.  It  seems,  therefore,  that 
the  distinguished  Catholic  writer,  Dr.  Gasquet,  is  quite  sound  in 
his  contention  that  we  should  look  to  Luther  rather  than  to  Wycliffe 
as  the  source  of  the  dogmatic  revolution ;  but  it  must  be  admitted 
that  English  Protestant  theologians  in  the  sixteenth  century  were 
influenced  by  the  study  of  Wycliffe's  writings. 

§  i.   Religious  Discontent  and  Lollardry1 

It  is  not  uncommonly  asserted  that  the  religious  changes  in 
England,  although  for  convenience'  sake  dated  from  the  rejection 
of  papal  supremacy,  were  in  reality  the  outcome  of  long-continued 
and  ever  increasing  dissatisfaction  with  the  then  existing  ecclesi- 
astical system.  The  pope's  refusal  to  grant  Henry  his  wished-for 
divorce  from  Catherine,  we  are  told,  was  a  mere  incident,  which 
at  most  precipitated  by  a  short  while  what  had  long  been  inevi- 

1  Gasquet,  The  Eve  of  the  Reformation,  ist  edition,  pp.  208  ff.  By  per- 
mission of  Dr.  Francis  A.  Gasquet. 

274 


The  Origin  of  the  Doctrinal  Revolt         275 

table.  Those  who  take  this  view  are  bound  to  believe  that  the 
Church  in  England  in  the  early  sixteenth  century  was  honey- 
combed by  disbelief  in  the  traditional  teachings,  and  that  men 
were  only  too  ready  to  welcome  emancipation.  What,  then,  is  the 
evidence  for  this  picture  of  the  religious  state  of  men's  minds  in 
England  on  the  eve  of  the  Reformation  ? 

It  is,  indeed,  not  improbable  that  up  and  down  the  country 
there  were,  at  this  period,  some  dissatisfied  spirits;  some  who 
would  eagerly  seize  any  opportunity  to  free  themselves  from  the 
restraints  which  no  longer  appealed  to  their  consciences,  and  from 
teachings  they  had  come  to  consider  as  mere  ecclesiastical  for- 
malism. A  Venetian  traveller  of  intelligence  and  observation, 
who  visited  the  country  at  the  beginning  of  the  century,  whilst 
struck  with  the  Catholic  practices  and  with  the  general  manifes- 
tations of  English  piety  he  witnessed,  understood  that  there  were 
"many  who  have  various  opinions  concerning  religion."  But  so 
far  as  there  is  evidence  at  all,  it  points  to  the  fact,  that,  of  religious 
unrest,  in  any  real  sense,  there  could  have  been  very  little  in  the 
country  generally.  It  is,  of  course,  impossible  to  suppose  that  any 
measurable  proportion  of  the  people  could  have  openly  rejected 
the  teaching  of  the  Church  or  have  been  even  crypto-Lollards, 
without  there  being  satisfactory  evidence  of  the  fact  forthcoming 
at  the  present  day. 

The  similarity  of  the  doctrines  held  by  the  English  reformers  of 
the  sixteenth  century  with  many  of  those  taught  by  the  followers 
of  Wycliffe  has,  indeed,  led  some  writers  to  assume  a  direct  con- 
nection between  them  Which  certainly  did  not  exist  in  fact.  So 
far  as  England  at  least  is  concerned,  there  is  no  justification  for 
assuming  for  the  Reformation  a  line  of  descent  from  any  form  of 
English  Lollardism.  It  is  impossible  to  study  the  century  which 
preceded  the  overthrow  of  the  old  religious  system  in  England 
without  coming  to  the  conclusion  that  as  a  body  the  Lollards  had 
been  long  extinct,  and  that  as  individuals,  scattered  over  the  length 
and  breadth  of  the  land,  without  any  practical  principle  of  cohe- 
sion, the  few  who  clung  to  the  tenets  of  Wycliffe  were  powerless 
to  effect  any  change  of  opinion  in  the  overwhelming  mass  of  the 
population  at  large.  Lollardry,  to  the  Englishman  of  the  day, 
was  "heresy,"  and  any  attempt  to  teach  it  was  firmly  repressed  by 
the  ecclesiastical  authority,  supported  by  the  strong  arm  of  the 
State ;  but  it  was  also  an  offence  against  the  common  feeling  of  the 
people,  and  there  can  be  no  manner  of  doubt  that  its  repression 
was  popular.  The  genius  of  Milton  enabled  him  to  see  the  fact 


2j6  English   Historians 

that  "Wycliffe's  preaching  was  soon  damped  and  stifled  by  the 
pope  and  prelates  for  six  or  seven  kings'  reigns,"  and  Mr.  James 
Gairdner,  whose  studies  in  this  period  of  our  national  history 
enable  him  to  speak  with  authority,  conies  to  the  same  conclusion. 
"Notwithstanding  the  darkness  that  surrounds  all  subjects  con- 
nected with  the  history  of  the  fifteenth  century,"  he  writes,  "we 
may  venture  pretty  safely  to  affirm  that  Lollardry  was  not  the 
beginning  of  modern  Protestantism.  Plausible  as  it  seems  to 
regard  Wycliffe  as  'the  morning  star  of  the  Reformation,'  the 
figure  conveys  an  impression  which  is  altogether  erroneous. 
Wycliffe's  real  influence  did  not  long  survive  his  own  day,  and  so 
far  from  Lollardry  having  taken  any  deep  root  among  the  English 
people,  the  traces  of  it  had  wholly  disappeared  long  before  the  great 
revolution  of  which  it  is  thought  to  be  the  forerunner.  At  all 
events,  in  the  rich  historical  material  for  the  beginning  of  Henry 
VIII's  reign,  supplied  by  the  correspondence  of  the  time,  we  look 
in  vain  for  a  single  indication  that  any  such  thing  as  a  Lollard 
sect  existed.  The  movement  had  died  a  natural  death;  from 
the  time  of  Oldcastle  it  sank  into  insignificance.  Though  still  for 
a  while  considerable  in  point  of  numbers,  it  no  longer  counted 
among  its  adherents  any  men  of  note ;  and  when  another  genera- 
tion had  passed  away  the  serious  action  of  civil  war  left  no  place 
for  the  crotchets  of  fanaticism." 

On  the  only  evidence  available,  the  student  of  the  reign  of 
Henry  VII  and  of  that  of  Henry  VIII  up  to  the  breach  with  Rome 
is  bound  to  come  to  the  same  conclusion  as  to  the  state  of  the 
English  Church.  If  we  except  manifestations  of  impatience  with 
the  pope  and  curia,  which  could  be  paralleled  in  any  age  and  coun- 
try, and  which  were  rather  on  the  secular  side  than  on  the  religious, 
there  is  nothing  that  would  make  us  think  that  England  was  not 
fully  loyal  in  mind  and  heart  to  the  established  ecclesiastical  sys- 
tem. In  fact,  as  Mr.  Brewer  says,  everything  proves  that  "the 
general  body  of  the  people  had  not  as  yet  learned  to  question  the 
established  doctrines  of  the  Church.  For  the  most  part,  they 
paid  their  Peter-pence  and  heard  mass,  and  did  as  their  fathers  had 
done  before  them." 

§  2.   Luther  and  his  English  Followers 

It  may  be  taken,  therefore,  for  granted  that  the  seeds  of  religious 
discord  were  not  the  product  of  the  country  itself,  nor,  so  far  as  we 
have  evidence  on  the  subject  at  all,  does  it  appear  that  the  soil  of 


The  Origin  of  the   Doctrinal   Revolt          277 

the  country  was  in  any  way  specially  adapted  for  its  fructification. 
The  work,  both  of  raising  the  seed  and  of  scattering  it  over  the  soil 
of  England,  must  be  attributed,  if  the  plain  facts  of  history  are  to 
be  believed,  to  Germans  and  the  handful  of  English  followers  of 
the  German  Reformers.  If  we  would  rightly  understand  the  re- 
ligious situation  in  England  at  the  commencement  of  the  Refor- 
mation, it  is  of  importance  to  inquire  into  the  methods  of  attack 
adopted  in  the  Lutheran  invasion,  and  to  note  the  chief  doctrinal 
points  which  were  first  assailed. 

Very  shortly  after  the  religious  revolt  had  established  itself  in 
Germany,  the  first  indications  of  a  serious  attempt  to  undermine 
the  traditional  faith  of  the  English  Church  became  manifest  in 
England.  Roger  Edgworth,  a  preacher  during  the  reigns  of  Henry 
and  Queen  Mary,  says  that  his  "long  labors  have  been  cast  in 
most  troublesome  times  and  most  encumbered  with  errors  and 
heresies,  change  of  minds  and  schisms  that  ever  was  in  the  realm. 
.  .  .  Whilst  I  was  a  young  student  in  divinity,"  he  continues, 
"Luther's  heresies  rose  and  were  scattered  here  in  this  realm, 
which,  in  less  space  than  a  man  would  think,  had  so  sore  infected 
the  Christian  folk,  first  the  youth  and  then  the  elders,  where  the 
children  could  set  their  fathers  to  school,  that  the  king's  Majesty 
and  all  Christian  clerks  in  the  realm  had  much  ado  to  extinguish 
them.  This  they  could  not  so  perfectly  quench,  but  that  ever  since, 
when  they  might  have  any  maintenance  by  man  or  woman  of  great 
power,  they  burst  forth  afresh,  even  like  fire  hid  under  chaff." 

§  3.    Protestant  Literature  in  England 

Sir  Thomas  More,  when  chancellor  in  1532,  attributed  the  rapid 
spread  of  what  to  him  and  most  people  of  his  day  in  England  was 
heresy,  to  the  flood  of  literature  which  was  poured  forth  over  the 
country  by  the  help  of  printing.  "We  have  had,"  he  writes, 
"some  years  of  late,  plenteous  of  evil  books.  For  they  have  grown 
up  so  fast  and  sprung  up  so  thick,  full  of  pestilent  errors  and  per- 
nicious heresies,  that  they  have  infected  and  killed,  1  fear  me, 
more  simple  souls  than  the  famine  of  the  dear  years  have  de- 
stroyed bodies." 

We  are  not  left  in  ignorance  as  to  the  books  here  referred  to, 
as  some  few  years  previously  the  bishops  of  England  had  issued 
a  list  of  the  prohibited  volumes.  Thus,  in  October,  1526,  Bishop 
Tunstall  ordered  that  in  London  people  should  be  warned  not  to 
read  the  works  in  question,  but  that  all  who  possessed  them  should 


278  English  Historians 

deliver  them  over  to  the  bishop's  officials  in  order  that  they  might 
be  destroyed  as  pernicious  literature.  The  list  included  several 
works  of  Luther,  three  or  four  of  Tyndale,  a  couple  of  Zwingli, 
and  several  isolated  works,  such  as  the  Supplication  0}  Beggars, 
and  the  Dyalogue  between  the  Father  and  the  Son. 

In  1530  the  king  by  proclamation  forbade  the  reading  or  pos- 
session of  some  eighty-five  works  of  Wycliffe,  Luther,  CEcolam- 
padius,  Zwingli,  Pomeranus,  Bucer,  Wesselius,  and  indeed  the 
German  divines  generally,  under  the  heading  of  "books  of  the 
Lutheran  sect  or  faction  conveyed  into  the  city  of  London." 
Besides  these  Latin  treatises,  the  prohibition  included  many 
English  tracts,  such  as  A  Book  0}  the  Old  God  and  the  New,  The 
Burying  o)  the  Mass,  Frith's  Disputation  concerning  Purgatory, 
and  several  prayer-books  intended  to  propagate  the  new  doc- 
trines, such  as  Godly  Prayers,  Matins  and  Evensong,  with  the 
Seven  Psalms  and  Other  Heavenly  Psalms  with  Commendations, 
the  Hortulus  Ammo,  in  English,  and  the  Primer  in  English. 

In  his  proclamation  Henry  VIII  speaks  of  the  determination 
of  the  English  nation  in  times  past  to  be  true  to  the  Catholic  faith 
and  to  defend  the  country  against  "wicked  sects  of  heretics  and 
Lollards,  who,  by  perversion  of  Holy  Scripture,  do  induce  erro- 
neous opinions,  sow  sedition  amongst  Christian  people,  and  dis- 
turb the  peace  and  tranquillity  of  Christian  realms,  as  lately  hap- 
pened in  some  parts  of  Germany,  where,  by  the  procurement  and 
sedition  of  Martin  Luther  and  other  heretics,  were  slain  an  infinite 
number  of  Christian  people."  To  prevent  like  misfortunes  hap- 
pening in  England,  he  orders  prompt  measures  to  be  taken  to 
put  a  stop  to  the  circulation  of  books  in  English  and  other  lan- 
guages, which  teach  things  "intolerable  to  the  clean  ears  of  any 
good  Christian  man." 

By  the  king's  command,  the  convocation  of  Canterbury  drew 
up  a  list  of  prohibited  heretical  books.  In  the  first  catalogue  of 
fifty-three  tracts  and  volumes,  there  is  no  mention  of  any  work  of 
Wycliffe,  and  besides  some  volumes  which  had  come  from  the  pens 
of  Tyndale,  Frith,  and  Roy,  who  were  acknowledged  disciples  of 
Luther,  the  rest  are  all  the  compositions  of  the  German  Reformers. 
The  same  may  be  said  of  a  supplementary  list  of  tracts,  the  authors 
of  which  were  unknown.  All  these  are  condemned  as  containing 
false  teaching,  plainly  contrary  to  the  Catholic  faith,  and  the 
bishops  add,  "Moreover,  following  closely  in  the  footsteps  of  our 
fathers,  we  prohibit  all  from  selling,  giving,  reading,  distributing, 
or  publishing  any  tract,  booklet,  pamphlet,  or  book,  which  trans- 


The  Origin  of  the  Doctrinal  Revolt         279 

lates  or  interprets  the  Holy  Scripture  in  the  vernacular  ...  or 
even  knowingly  to  keep  such  volumes  without  the  license  of  their 
diocesan  in  writing." 

About  the  same  time  a  committee  of  bishops,  including  Arch- 
bishop Warham  and  Bishop  Tunstall,  was  appointed  to  draw  up 
a  list  of  some  of  the  principal  errors  contained  in  the  prohibited 
works  of  English  heretics  beyond  the  sea.  The  king  had  heard  that 
"many  books  in  the  English  tongue  containing  many  detestable 
errors  and  damnable  opinions,  printed  in  parts  beyond  the  sea," 
were  being  brought  into  England  and  spread  abroad.  He  was 
unwilling  that  "such  evil  seed  sown  amongst  his  people  (should) 
so  take  root  that  it  might  overgrow  the  corn  of  the  Catholic  doctrine 
before  sprung  up  in  the  souls  of  his  subjects,"  and  he  conse- 
quently ordered  this  examination.  This  has  been  done  and  the 
errors  noted,  "albeit  many  more  there  be  in  those  books,  which 
books  totally  do  swarm  full  of  heresies  and  detestable  opinions." 
The  books  thus  examined  and  noted  were  eight  in  number; 
The  Wicked  Mammon,  the  Obedience  of  Christian  Man,  the  Reve- 
lation of  Antichrist,  the  Sum  of  Scripture,  the  Book  of  Beggars, 
the  Kalendar  of  the  Prymer,  the  Prymer,  and  an  Exposition  unto 
the  Seventh  Chapter  of  I  Corinthians.  From  these  some  hundreds 
of  propositions  were  culled  which  contradicted  the  plain  teach- 
ing of  the  Church  in  matters  of  faith  and  morality.  In  this  con- 
demnation, as  the  king  states  in  his  directions  to  preachers  to 
publish  the  same,  the  commission  were  unanimous. 

The  attack  on  the  traditional  teachings  of  the  Church,  more- 
over, was  not  confined  to  unimportant  points.  From  the  first, 
high  and  fundamental  doctrines,  as  it  seemed  to  men  in  those  days, 
were  put  in  peril.  The  works  set  forth  by  the  advocates  of  the 
change  speak  for  themselves,  and,  when  contrasted  with  those  of 
Luther,  leave  no  room  for  doubt  that  they  were  founded  on  them, 
and  inspired  by  the  spirit  of  the  leader  of  the  revolt,  although,  as 
was  inevitable  in  such  circumstances,  in  particulars  the  disciples 
proved  themselves  in  advance  of  their  master.  Writing  in  1546, 
Dr.  Richard  Smythe  contrasts  the  old  times,  when  the  faith  was 
respected,  with  the  then  state  of  mental  unrest  in  religious  matters. 
"In  our  days,"  he  writes,  "not  a  few  things,  nor  of  small  impor- 
tance, but  (alack  the  more  is  the  pity)  even  the  chiefest  and  most 
weighty  matters  of  our  religion  and  faith  are  called  in  question, 
babbled,  talked,  and  jangled  upon  (reasoned  I  cannot  nor  ought 
not  to  call  it) .  These  matters  in  times  past  (when  reason  had  place 
and  virtue  with  learning  was  duly  regarded,  yea,  and  vice  with 


28o  English  Historians 

insolency  was  generally  detested  and  abhorred)  were  held  in  such 
reverence  and  honor,  in  such  esteem  and  dignity,  yea,  so  received 
and  embraced  by  all  estates,  that  it  was  not  in  any  wise  sufferable 
that  tag  and  rag,  learned  and  unlearned,  old  and  young,  wise  and 
foolish,  boys  and  wenches,  master  and  man,  tinkers  and  tilers,  col- 
liers and  cobblers,  with  other  such  raskabilia  might  at  their  pleasure 
rail  and  jest  (for  what  is  it  else  they  now  do  ?)  against  everything 
that  is  good  and  virtuous,  against  all  things  that  are  expedient  and 
profitable,  not  sparing  any  sacrament  of  the  Church  or  ordinance 
of  the  same,  no  matter  how  laudable,  decent,  or  fitting  it  has  been 
regarded  in  times  past,  or  how  much  it  be  now  accepted  by  good 
and  Catholic  men.  In  this  way,  both  by  preaching  and  teaching 
(if  it  so  ought  to  be  called),  playing,  writing,  printing,  singing,  and 
(oh,  good  Lord !)  in  how  many  other  ways  besides,  divers  of  our 
age,  being  their  own  schoolmasters,  or  rather  scholars  of  the  devil, 
have  not  forborne  or  feared  to  speak  and  write  against  the  most 
excellent  and  most  blessed  sacrament  of  the  altar,  affirming  that 
the  said  sacrament  is  nothing  more  than  a  bare  figure,  and  that 
there  is  not  in  the  same  sacrament  the  very  body  and  blood  of  our 
blessed  Saviour  and  Redeemer  Jesus  Christ,  but  only  a  naked  sign, 
a  token,  a  memorial  and  a  remembrance  only  of  the  same,  if  they 
take  it  for  so  much  even  and  do  not  call  it  (as  they  are  wont  to  do) 
an  idol  and  very  plain  idolatry." 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Froude,  History  of  England,VcA.  I,  chap.  vi.  Dixon,  History  of  the  Church 
of  England,  Vol.  III.  Green,  History  of  the  English  People,  Vol.  II,  Book 
VI,  chap.  ii.  Pocock,  Condition  of  Morals  and  Religious  Belief  in  the  Reign 
of  Edward  VI,  in  the  English  Historical  Review,  1895,  pp.  417  ff.  Tre- 
velyan,  England  in  the  Age  of  Wycliffe,  chap,  ix,  an  argument  for  the  sur- 
vival of  Lollardry  which  should  be  compared  with  Gairdner,  History  of  the 
English  Church  in  the  Sixteenth  Century,  chaps,  iii  and  iv. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  LAST  DAYS   OF  ARCHBISHOP  CRANMER 

AMONG  the  leaders  who  worked  for  the  introduction  of  revolu- 
tionary doctrinal  changes  into  the  English  Church  during  the  six-" 
teenth  century  there  is  no  more  distinguished  or  striking  figure 
than  Thomas  Cranmer.  His  strange  and  varying  fortunes  ending 
in  his  tragic  death  have  made  his  character  exceedingly  difficult 
to  understand.  To  many  he  is  the  great  martyr  to  the  Protestant 
faith  of  the  English  Church.  On  the  other  hand,  a  recent  Catho- 
lic writer,  J.  M.  Stone,  in  a  volume  on  Queen  Mary,  renders  a  sum- 
mary judgment  in  the  following  fashion:  " Cranmer  suffered  ac- 
cording to  the  notions  of  his  day,  on  his  own  principles,  and  for 
causes  which  he  had  himself  judged  sufficient  for  death.  He  had 
not  only  sent  men  and  women  to  the  stake  for  the  very  same 
opinions  which  he  afterwards  professed,  and  had  burnt  Catholics 
because  they  would  not  acknowledge  the  king's  supreme  headship, 
but  had  burnt  Protestants  because  their  Protestantism  differed 
from  his  own.  All  things  considered,  it  was  wonderful  that  he 
did  not  receive  shorter  shrift."  Among  the  favorable  estimates 
of  Cranmer,  that  by  Professor  Pollard  in  his  Life  of  Cranmer  is 
both  scholarly  and  judicial. 

§  i.   Cranmer  and  the  Appeal  to  a  General  Council1 

While  the  pope  was  pronouncing  him  contumacious  for  taking 
no  care  to  obey  his  citation  and  was  condemning  him  to  be  deprived 
and  degraded  as  an  obstinate  heretic,  and  while  he  was  being  burnt 
in  effigy  at  Rome,  Cranmer  was  engaged  in  drawing  up  an  appeal 
to  a  general  council.  The  law  of  nature,  he  wrote  to  a  legal  friend 

1  Pollard,  Thomas  Cranmer,  pp.  356  ff.  By  permission  of  Professor 
Pollard  and  G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons,  Publishers. 

281 


282  English  Historians 

whose  assistance  he  sought,  required  every  man  to  defend  his 
own  life  so  far  as  it  might  be  done  without  offence  to  God ;  and  lest 
he  should  seem  rashly  and  unadvisedly  to  cast  himself  away,  he 
had  resolved  to  follow  Luther's  example  in  appealing  from  Leo  X. 
He  was  bound  by  oath,  he  said,  never  to  consent  to  the  reception 
of  the  pope's  authority  in  England ;  from  this  came  all  his  trouble, 
so  that  the  quarrel  was  personal  between  him  and  the  pope,  and 
no  man  could  be  a  lawful  and  indifferent  judge  in  his  own  cause ; 
therefore,  he  had  good  reason  in  appealing  to  a  general  council. 
Not  that  he  thought  his  life  would  thereby  be  saved ;  he  was  well 
aware  that  in  1460,  Pius  II  by  his  "execrable"  Bull  had  forbidden 
all  such  appeals  to  a  general  council,  and  thus  made  absolute  his 
own  jurisdiction.  "The  chiefest  cause  in  very  deed  (to  tell  you 
the  truth),"  wrote  Cranmer,  "of  this  mine  appeal  is  that  I  might 
gain  time  (if  it  shall  so  please  God)  to  live  until  I  have  furnished 
mine  answer  against  Marcus  Antonius  Constantine,  which  I  now 
have  in  hand." 

The  appeal  was  a  stirring  and  striking  document.  Cranmer 
paid  an  eloquent  tribute  therein  to  Rome's  services  in  early  times: 
"The  Church  of  Rome,  as  it  were,  lady  of  the  world,  both  was, 
and  was  also  counted  worthily,  the  mother  of  other  churches; 
forasmuch  as  she  them  first  begat  to  Christ,  nourished  them  with 
the  food  of  pure  doctrine,  did  help  them  with  her  riches,  succored 
the  oppressed,  and  was  a  sanctuary  for  the  miserable,  she  re- 
joiced with  them  that  rejoiced  and  wept  with  them  that  wept. 
Then  by  the  examples  of  the  bishops  of  Rome  riches  were  despised, 
worldly  glory  and  pomp  were  trodden  under  foot,  pleasures  and 
riot  nothing  regarded.  Then  this  frail  and  uncertain  life,  being 
full  of  all  miseries,  was  laughed  to  scorn, whiles  through  the  example 
of  Romish  martyrs,  men  did  everywhere  press  forward  to  the  life 
to  come.  But  afterward  the  ungraciousness  of  damnable  ambition 
never  satisfied,  avarice  and  the  horrible  enormity  of  vices  had 
corrupted  and  taken  the  See  of  Rome,  there  followed  everywhere 
almost  the  deformities  of  all  churches  growing  out  of  kind  into 
the  manners  of  the  Church,  their  mother,  leaving  their  former 
innocency  and  purity,  and  slipping  into  foul  and  heinous  usages. 
For  the  aforesaid  and  many  other  griefs  and  abuses,  since  refor- 
mation of  the  above-mentioned  abuses  is  not  to  be  looked  for  of 
the  Bishop  of  Rome ;  neither  can  I  hope  by  reason  of  his  wicked 
abuses  and  usurped  authority  to  have  him  an  equal  judge  in  his 
own  cause,  therefore  I  do  challenge  and  appeal  in  these  writings 
from  the  pope." 


The  Last  Days  of  Archbishop  Cranmer        283 

He  protested  against  being  condemned  in  his  absence;  he 
could  not  appear  in  person,  for  he  was  straitly  kept  in  prison; 
"and  though  I  would  never  so  fain  send  any  proctor,  yet  by  reason 
of  poverty  I  am  not  able  (for  all  that  ever  I  had,  wherewith  I  should 
bear  my  proctor's  costs  and  charges,  is  quite  taken  from  me)." 

§  2.   Degradation  of  Cranmer 

This  appeal  Cranmer  had  no  means  of  lodging,  and  on  Feb- 
ruary 13,  1556,  Bonner  and  Thirlby  went  down  to  Oxford  to  exe- 
cute the  papal  commission  for  his  degradation.  The  procedure 
on  such  occasions  was  a  monument  of  exquisite  cruelty ;  nothing 
that  ingenuity  could  devise  was  omitted  to  abase  the  victim  and 
wound  his  spirit ;  and  while  Bonner  gloated  over  his  task,  Thirlby 
must  have  suffered  at  least  as  much  as  Cranmer.  He  was  a  man 
of  humanity  and  had  received  promotion,  friendship,  and  other 
benefits  from  the  archbishop.  "Whether  it  were  a  jewel,"  writes 
Morice,  "plate,  instrument,  maps,  horse,  or  anything  else,  Thirlby 
had  but  to  admire,  and  Cranmer  would  give  it  him."  Calling  the 
prisoner  before  them  in  the  choir  of  Christ  Church  Cathedral,  the 
two  papal  commissioners  read  their  commission.  When  they  came 
to  the  statement  that  his  cause  had  been  indifferently  (i.e.  impar- 
tially) heard  at  Rome,  and  that  he  had  lacked  nothing  necessary 
for  his  defence,  Cranmer  was  moved  to  anger.  "God  must 
needs,"  he  exclaimed,  "punish  this  open  and  shameless  lying." 
Next  he  was  clothed  in  the  vestments  of  all  the  seven  orders  and 
with  the  insignia  of  an  archbishop,  a  staff  was  put  in  his  hand 
and  a  mitre  upon  his  head.  Then  Bonner  mocked  him :  — 

"This  is  the  man,"  he  said,  "that  hath  ever  despised  the  pope's 
Holiness,  and  now  is  to  be  judged  by  him ;  this  is  the  man  that  hath 
pulled  down  so  many  churches  and  now  is  come  to  be  judged  in  the 
Church ;  this  is  the  man  that  contemned  the  blessed  sacrament  of 
the  altar,  and  now  is  come  to  be  condemned  before  that  blessed 
sacrament  hanging  over  the  altar;  this  is  the  man  that  like  Lucifer 
sat  in  the  place  of  Christ  upon  an  altar  to  judge  others,  and  now 
is  come  before  an  altar  to  be  judged  himself." 

So  pained  was  Thirlby  at  this  exhibition  that  more  than  once  he 
pulled  Bonner's  sleeve  to  stop  him.  After  this  they  began  to  strip 
Cranmer  of  his  robes.  As  they  took  off  his  pall  he  asked,  "Which 
of  you  hath  a  pall  to  take  off  my  pall?"  He  was  an  archbishop, 
they  only  bishops;  they  acted,  they  replied,  not  as  bishops,  but  as 
papal  delegates.  They  then  wrested  the  crozier  staff  from  his 


284  English  Historians 

hands,  while  he  drew  from  his  sleeve  his  appeal  to  a  general; 
council.  Thirlby  said  they  could  admit  no  appeal,  and  the  de- 
grading rite  went  on.  Bonner  scraped  his  ringers  and  nails  to 
obliterate  the  effects  of  an  unction  administered  twenty-three 
years  before.  Divested  of  episcopal  rank,  Cranmer  was  then  suc- 
cessively degraded  from  the  orders  of  priest,  deacon,  subdeacon, 
acolyte,  exorcist,  lector,  and  doorkeeper.  Finally  a  barber  shaved 
his  head  to  deprive  him  of  whatever  grace  a  long-disused  tonsure 
may  have  originally  given  him.  "Now,"  exclaimed  Bonner  in 
brutal  triumph,  "now  you  are  no  lord  any  more."  "All  this," 
said  Cranmer,  "needed  not;  I  had  myself  done  with  this  gear 
long  ago." 

§  3.    The  First  Dated  Recantation 

Clad  in  "a  poor  yeoman-beadle's  gown,  full  bare  and  nearly 
worn,"  Cranmer  was  now  as  a  layman  handed  over  to  the  secular 
authorities,  whom  Bonner,  if  he  followed  the  usual  form,  besought 
not  to  expose  their  charge  to  any  danger  of  death  or  mutilation. 
He  was  taken  back  to  Bocardo,  where  two  days  later  he  made  the 
first  of  his  dated  recantations.  It  stands  forth  among  All  the 
Submissions  and  Recantations  0}  Thomas  Cranmer,  officially  pub- 
lished after  his  death ;  and  according  to  another  recently  discov- 
ered narrative,  he  had  for  six  weeks  or  more  been  listening  to  the 
persuasions  of  two  Spanish  friars,  Pedro  de  Soto  and  John  de 
Villa  Garcia,  and  of  his  jailor,  Nicholas  Wodson.  He  is  also 
said  to  have  asked  for  an  interview  with  his  old  friend  Tunstall, 
who  replied  that  Cranmer  was  more  likely  to"  shake  him  than  be 
convinced  by  him,  and  with  Cardinal  Pole,  who  gathered  up  all 
his  skirts  when  there  was  fear  of  contact  with  heretics.  It  is  as 
a  result  of  these  persuasions  that  Cranmer  is  supposed  to  have 
signed  the  first  three  of  his  recantations;  but  they  are  not  really 
recantations  at  all.  In  the  official  version  the  first  two  are  merely 
styled  "submissions,"  and  the  third  still  more  vaguely  a  "scrip- 
turn."  They  are,  in  fact,  only  submissions  to  authority,  such  as 
Cranmer's  political  principles  almost  compelled  him  to  make. 

It  must  always  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  English  Reformers  of 
the  sixteenth  century  as  a  rule  recognized  no  such  thing  as  the  right 
to  individual  judgment,  and  its  necessary  corollary,  religious 
toleration.  Every  form  of  government  is  based  on  a  compromise 
between  two  principles,  either  of  which,  when  pushed  to  extremes, 
b  fatal  to  human  society.  The  idea  of  private  judgment  ulti- 
mately leads  to  anarchy,  and  the  doctrine  of  authority  to  slavery. 


The   Last  Days  of  Archbishop  Cranmer        285 

In  some  cases  the  law  must  override  individual  conscience,  while 
on  the  other  hand,  unless  individual  conscience  had  occasionally 
defied  the  law,  there  would  have  been  no  progress ;  and  men  who 
denounce  most  vigorously  resistance  to  the  law  are  often  first  to 
resist  when  the  law  touches  their  own  individual  conscience. 
Cranmer  was  now  at  the  crux  of  the  difficulty.  The  question  for 
him,  as  for  most  others,  had  been  between  the  authority  of  the 
pope  and  that  of  the  English  State  represented  by  the  king.  He 
had  unreservedly  decided  for  the  authority  of  the  State,  and  he 
was  deeply  imbued  with  the  sixteenth-century  notions  of  the 
wickedness  of  resistance  to  the  king's  authority.  He  had  in  1549 
told  the  rebels  of  Devon  with  unnecessary  emphasis  that  if  the 
whole  world  prayed  for  them  till  doomsday,  it  would  not  avail 
them  unless  they  repented  their  disobedience. 

This  theory  involved  but  slight  inconvenience  when  Henry  or 
Edward  was  king,  and  when  their  laws  concurred  with  Cranmer's 
conscience  in  renouncing  the  pope  and  his  doctrine.  But  when 
Mary  was  queen  the  trouble  began.  If  the  English  sovereign, 
Church,  and  Parliament  had  the  right  to  abolish  the  papal  juris- 
diction, had  they  not  also  the  right  to  restore  it  ?  And  this  author- 
ity restored,  on  what  grounds  could  Cranmer  resist?  When  ar- 
guing with  Sir  Thomas  More  about  the  oath  of  succession  in  1534, 
he  had  suggested  that  More's  conscience  was  doubtful  about  his 
duty  to  swear,  but  there  was  no  doubt  about  his  duty  to  obey  the 
king.  Even  More  confesses  that  he  was  unable  at  first  to  rebut  the 
argument;  yet  he  had  surer  ground  than  Cranmer  in  1556  when 
the  same  reasoning  was  turned  against  him.  For  More  could 
say  that  the  voice  of  the  Catholic  Church  justified  him  in  refusing 
in  this  instance  obedience  to  the  king ;  but  Cranmer  could  not 
plead  the  authority  of  the  Church.  For  good  or  for  ill,  he  had 
pinned  his  faith  and  allegiance  to  the  State ;  and  logically  he  was 
driven  to  obey  the  State  even  when  it  asserted  the  jurisdiction  of 
Rome.  Was  there  not  also  scriptural  warrant  for  yielding  under 
compulsion  ?  Had  not  Elisha  promised  pardon  to  Naaman  when- 
ever he  bowed  the  knee  in  the  House  of  Rimmon  ? 

It  was  this  distressing  dilemma  which  produced  Cranmer's 
first  submission ;  he  recognized  the  papal  authority,  not  because 
its  claims  had  any  intrinsic  weight,  but  because  the  law  of  Eng- 
land, which  he  was  bound  to  obey,  had  re-imposed  that  authority. 
"Forasmuch,"  he  wrote,  "as  the  king's  and  queen's  Majesties,  by 
consent  of  the  Parliament,  have  received  the  pope's  authority 
within  this  realm,  I  am  content  to  submit  myself  to  their  laws 


286  English  Historians 

herein."  Yet  he  was  not  content;  his  conscience  warred  with  his 
logic.  Whatever  the  laws  might  say,  his  conscience  did  not  admit 
the  papal  claims.  He  had  sworn  to  renounce  the  pope,  and 
that  oath  represented  his  real  convictions.  Scarcely  had  he  signed 
the  first  submission  before  he  cancelled  it,  throwing  logic  to  the 
winds  and  taking  refuge  in  conscience.  But  then,  what  about  his 
oath  of  allegiance  to  Mary  and  her  laws?  Was  not  that  also  a 
conscientious  oath  ?  Undoubtedly  it  was ;  his  conscience  was  now 
divided  against  itself,  while  logic  counselled  submission.  Thus 
divided,  his  conscience  could  not  stand,  and  a  second  submission 
followed,  more  complete  than  the  first. 

§  4.   Cranmer's  Renewed  Submissions 

The  date  of  these  two  submissions  cannot  be  ascertained. 
Perhaps  they  preceded  his  degradation,  on  February  14.  If  so, 
they  were  annulled  by  the  appeal  he  then  presented  to  a  general 
council,  in  which  he  spoke  of  the  heinous  and  usurped  authority 
of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  and  by  his  declaration  during  the  ceremony 
that  he  would  never  again  say  mass.  Either  the  indignities  then 
suffered  renewed  his  abhorrence  of  the  papal  system  or  the  pres- 
entation of  his  appeal  gave  him  fresh  confidence ;  for  when  Bonner 
visited  him  in  Bocardo  on  February  15  and  16  he  could  only  extort 
from  him  submissions  much  more  guarded  than  before.  These 
are  the  third  and  fourth  recantations;  the  third,  while  expressing 
readiness  to  submit  to  the  laws  of  the  king  and  queen  concerning 
the  pope's  supremacy,  promised  with  regard  to  his  books  submis- 
sion not  to  the  pope,  but  only  to  the  judgment  of  the  Catholic 
Church  and  of  the  next  general  council.  The  fourth  recantation, 
dated  February  15,  was  the  first  in  which  Cranmer  made  any  direct 
reference  to  questions  of  doctrine,  and  he  did  so  "in  terms  which 
might  have  been  subscribed  by  any  of  the  martyrs  that  had  died." 
He  simply  declared  his  belief  to  be  in  accord  with  that  of  the 
Catholic  Church ;  that,  of  course,  had  all  along  been  his  conten- 
tion: popery  was  a  corruption  of  Catholicism. 

These  documents  Bonner  took  back  to  London,  where  it  now 
devolved  upon  the  government,  that  is  to  say  Queen  Mary  and 
Cardinal  Pole,  to  decide  what  was  to  be  done  with  the  degraded 
archbishop.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  they  ever  in- 
tended to  spare  his  life.  They  would  have  thought  it  presumption 
to  neglect  a  papal  sentence,  and  indeed  those  condemned  by  the 
Church  were  as  a  matter  of  course  in  Mary's  reign  sent  to  the 


The  Last  Days  of  Archbishop  Cranmer        287 

stake.  From  their  point  of  view,  Cranmer  had  done  evil  for  which 
his  death  would  be  but  a  slight  atonement ;  unable  to  comprehend 
the  state  of  mind  which  led  men  to  reject  the  doctrine  of  Rome, 
they  and  many  others  since  their  time  attributed  the  whole  Refor- 
mation in  England  to  the  divorce  of  Queen  Catherine,  in  which 
Cranmer  had  played  no  small  part.  That  to  Mary  was  naturally 
a  grievous  offence,  and  others  who  shared  the  guilt  with  Cranmer 
were  not  sorry  that  he  alone  should  bear  the  responsibility.  Nor, 
although  the  contrary  has  often  been  asserted,  was  it  illegal  to 
burn  a  penitent  heretic. 

§  5.   Preparation  for  the  Complete  Humiliation  of  Cranmer 

But  Mary  and  Pole  had  wider  objects  in  view  than  the  satis- 
faction of  a  personal  animus  against  Cranmer  or  the  exemplary 
punishment  of  the  greatest  living  heretical  Englishman.  They 
desired  to  serve  the  general  cause  of  Roman  Catholicism.  It 
was  not  enough  that  Cranmer  should  die ;  he  must  also  be  made 
to  ruin  the  Reformation.  Northumberland  had  "turned  many" 
by  his  speech  on  the  scaffold;  if  Cranmer  would  only  repeat  the 
performance,  the  candle  lighted  by  Ridley  and  Latimer  might  be 
snuffed  out  after  all.  Cranmer's  weakening  on  the  point  of  the 
papal  supremacy  had  already  suggested  that  he  might  be  used 
for  this  purpose,  and  after  Bonner's  return  to  London  means  were 
considered  for  producing  a  deeper  impression  on  Cranmer's  mind. 
Terror  was  first  employed,  and  on  February  24  the  queen  signed 
a  warrant  for  his  committal  to  the  flames.  No  date  was  fixed, 
but  Cranmer  was  given  to  understand  that  the  writ  had  been 
signed. 

When  a  sufficient  interval  had  elapsed  for  this  information  to 
work  on  the  prisoner's  mind,  his  treatment  was  suddenly  changed. 
The  prison  doors  were  thrown  open,  and  Cranmer  exchanged  his 
dungeon  in  Bocardo  for  the  pleasant  deanery  of  Christ  Church. 
There  he  was  used  with  every  consideration.  He  walked  in  the 
gardens,  played  bowls  on  the  green,  enjoyed  the  converse  of  men 
of  learning  and  wit,  and  lacked  no  delicate  fare.  Bishop  Brooks 
at  his  trial  told  him  that,  "Whereas  you  were  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury and  Metropolitan  of  England,  it  is  ten  to  one  (I  say)  that 
ye  shall  be  as  well  still,  yea,  even  better."  All  these  things  might 
be  given  him  if  — . 


288  English  Historians 


§  6.    The  Real  Recantation 

Then  Cranmer  fell.  He  signed  his  fifth  or  real  recantation,  in 
which  he  anathematized  the  whole  heresy  of  Luther  and  Zwingli, 
confessed  his  belief  in  one  holy  and  visible  Catholic  Church, 
beyond  the  pale  of  which  there  was  no  salvation,  and  recognized 
the  pope  as  Christ's  vicar  and  supreme  head  of  the  Church  on 
earth.  The  true  body  and  blood  of  Christ  were,  he  declared, 
really  present  under  the  forms  of  bread  and  wine  in  the  sacrament; 
the  bread  was  translated  into  the  body  and  the  wine  into  the  blood 
of  Christ.  He  acknowledged  the  six  other  sacraments  and  the 
existence  of  purgatory.  This  was  no  mere  submission  to  outward 
authority,  but  a  professedly  complete  recantation  of  inward  belief 
extorted  from  him  by  the  poignant  contrast  between  the  pleasant 
prospect  of  life  and  the  vivid  horror  of  an  agonizing  death.  He 
surrendered  every  point  for  which  he  had  fought;  the  "comfort 
he  had  in  Christ"  had  not,  as  he  hoped,  enabled  him  "to  cast 
away  all  fear." 

Unfortunately,  human  frailty  has  made  Cranmer's  case  a  type 
rather  than  an  exception  among  religious  leaders.  But  they  lived 
in  times  far  removed  from  the  comfortable  immunity  which  now 
attends  doctrinal  vagaries;  and  it  is  more  charitable  and  perhaps 
more  fruitful  to  attempt  to  understand  the  psychological  problem 
presented  by  cases  like  those  of  St.  Peter,  Hus,  Jerome  of  Prague, 
Savonarola,  Cranmer,  and  Galileo  than  to  make  broad  our  phy- 
lacteries and  point  the  finger  of  scorn  at  those  who  succumbed  to 
a  test  which  their  critics  have  never  stood.  How  comes  it  that 
an  ordinary  dervish  will  face  death  without  flinching  when  great 
religious  leaders  have  quailed  ?  No  doubt  the  horrible  mode  of  a 
heretic's  death  supplied  an  additional  terror,  and  courage  comes 
easier  on  the  spur  of  the  moment,  and  in  the  heat  of  the  battle 
than  after  prolonged  reflection.  But  it  is  also  true  that  the  more 
sensitive  the  mind  is,  the  greater  is  the  fortitude  required  to  con- 
front danger.  It  is  easy  for  the  dull  brain  to  face  death;  a  dog, 
could  it  reason,  could  never  be  made  to  recant,  because  it  would 
fail  to  imagine  death.  But  an  impressionable  imagination  like 
Cranmer's  paints  the  unknown  horrors  of  the  stake  in  the  most 
vivid  colors.  It  was  the  working  of  his  imaginative  and  sus- 
ceptible mind  which  drove  Cranmer  to  yield  when  less  impression- 
able men  like  Hooper,  Ridley,  and  Latimer  successfully  bore  the 
strain. 


The   Last  Days  of  Archbishop  Cranmer        289 

In  another  respect  Cranmer  was  less  fitted  than  his  colleagues 
to  withstand  the  attack.  A  man  who  sees  only  one  side  of  truth  at 
a  time  is  proof  against  doubt;  but  the  man  of  broader  intellect, 
who  knows  that  truth  is  relative  and  feels  the  force  of  hostile  ar- 
guments, is  inevitably  less  dogmatic  and  less  absolutely  sure  of  the 
impregnability  of  his  position.  In  these  days  of  comparative  study 
it  might  almost  be  said  that  to  be  positive  is  to  be  ignorant ;  and 
few  there  are  who  would  give  their  bodies  to  be  burnt  on  the  as- 
sumption that  their  opinion  was  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but 
the  truth.  Cranmer  was  much  nearer  this  modern  position  than 
his  contemporaries;  he  knew,  none  better,  that  on  the  impreg- 
nable rock  of  Holy  Scripture  could  be  based  arguments  against 
him  as  well  as  for  him,  and  that  the  voice  of  the  Church  had  varied 
in  various  ages.  Even  general  councils,  he  knew,  could  err; 
was  he,  then,  unique  and  infallible?  His  distressing  dilemma 
between  a  conscience  which  bade  him  renounce  the  pope  and  a 
conscience  which  bade  him  obey  his  sovereign  opened  a  breach 
through  which  doubts  rushed  in  and  submerged  him. 

The  date  of  his  fifth  recantation  is  uncertain,  but  it  was  in 
print  before  March  13,  when  the  privy  council  summoned  the 
printers  before  them  and  ordered  all  copies  to  be  burnt.  An 
English  translation  of  this  document,  writes  the  Venetian  am- 
bassador on  March  24,  "was  published  in  London,  and  as  it  was 
signed  by  Father  Soto  and  his  associate,  both  Spaniards,  .  .  .  the 
Londoners  not  only  had  suspicion  of  the  document,  but  openly 
pronounced  it  a  forgery ;  so  the  lords  of  the  council  were  obliged 
to  suppress  it  and  to  issue  another  witnessed  by  Englishmen." 

§  7.    The  Sixth  Confession  and  its  Purpose 

It  may  have  been  partly  to  demolish  forever  these  suspicions  of 
forgery  that  Cranmer,  who  was  now  —  if  not  before  —  sent  back 
to  Bocardo,  was  required  to  make  a  sixth  and  still  more  debasing 
confession ;  but  the  main  object  seems  to  have  been  to  cover  the 
whole  history  of  the  Reformation  with  shame  and  indelible  infamy. 
Hitherto  Cranmer  had  only  professed  a  complete  change  of  mind, 
without  directly  accusing  his  past  career.  Now  he  was  to  depict 
his  misdeeds  in  the  blackest  hues,  and  to  attribute  to  his  own 
sinister  influence  the  whole  series  of  woes  which  had  lately  afflicted 
the  realm.  "I  have  sinned"  (such  were  the  words  put  into  his 
mouth)  "most  grievously,  before  Heaven  and  against  the  realm  of 
England,  yea,  against  the  whole  Church  of  Christ;  I  have  per- 


290  English  Historians 

secuted  more  furiously  than  Paul;  I  have  blasphemed,  per- 
secuted, and  maltreated."  He  was  then  made  to  compare  himself 
with  the  thief  on  the  cross,  and  to  imply  that,  like  the  thief,  he  only 
repented  when  his  means  to  do  harm  had  failed.  He  was  most 
deserving,  proceeded  the  confession,  not  only  of  all  human  and 
temporal,  but  divine  and  eternal  punishment,  "because  I  did 
exceeding  great  wrong  to  Henry  VIII,  and  especially  to  his  wife, 
Queen  Catherine,  when  I  became  the  cause  and  author  of  their 
divorce,  which  crime,  indeed,  was  the  seed-plot  of  all  the  evils 
and  calamities  of  this  realm.  Hence  came  the  death  of  so  many 
good  men,  hence  the  schism  of  the  whole  realm,  hence  heresies, 
hence  the  confounding  of  so  many  minds  and  bodies.  ...  I 
opened  wide  the  windows  to  heresies  of  every  sort,  of  which  I 
myself  was  the  chief  doctor  and  ductor.  ...  In  this,  indeed, 
I  was  not  only  worse  than  Saul  and  the  thief,  but  most  accursed 
of  all  whom  the  earth  has  ever  borne."  .  .  . 

This  last  shameful  confession  —  more  shameful  to  those  who 
dictated  it  than  to  the  heart-broken  captive  who  signed  it  —  was 
dated  March  18.  It  would  reach  London  on  the  following  day. 
Queen  Mary  and  Pole  had  now  got  what  they  wanted  and  all  they 
could  hope  to  obtain.  Here  was  a  version  of  recent  history  even 
more  pleasing  to  them  than  that  of  Northumberland.  When 
the  chief  prophet  of  reform  had  cursed  it  in  terms  like  these, 
who  should  be  found  to  bless  or  defend  ?  A  single  and  final  ser- 
vice had  Cranmer  performed ;  he  could  be  of  no  further  use  except 
to  repeat  in  public  his  private  confession;  he  might  now  be  dis- 
missed to  the  stake.  Orders  were  given  at  once,  which  would 
reach  Oxford  on  the  zoth,  that  Cranmer  should  be  burnt  on  the 
following  day.  Dr.  Cole,  Provost  of  Eton,  was  warned  to  prepare 
a  sermon,  and  Lord  Williams  of  Thame  and  other  local  magnates 
were  directed  to  summon  their  forces  to  maintain  order  at  the 
public  execution.  Cole  arrived  in  Oxford  on  the  aoth,  and  the 
lords  and  their  retainers  in  the  early  hours  next  morning. 

§  8.   The  Seventh  Recantation 

It  was  probably  on  the  day  before  his  death  that  Cranmer  com- 
posed what  is  called  his  seventh  recantation.  It  consisted  of  the 
address  he  should  make  to  the  people  at  his  execution,  and  when 
he  wrote  it  out  he  must  have  already  known  that  he  was  to  die 
on  the  morrow.  His  sixth  recantation  had  bent  the  bow  to  the 
uttermost ;  could  a  religious  system  which  involved  such  cruelty 


The  Last  Days  of  Archbishop  Cranmer        291 

• 

be  just  or  true  ?  He  was  still  in  the  valley  of  doubts  and  fears, 
the  light  had  begun  to  glimmer,  and  the  harrowed  mind  to  hope. 
Although  this  seventh  document  asserts  the  real  and  substantial 
presence  of  Christ  in  the  Eucharist,  and  repudiates  the  books  he 
had  written  against  that  doctrine  since  the  death  of  Henry  VIII, 
it  contains  no  such  painful  language  as  its  predecessors  and  not  a 
word  of  submission  to  the  pope:  apart  from  the  sacrament  it 
merely  professes  the  creed  of  the  English  Reformers.  "I  believe," 
he  says,  "every  article  of  the  Catholic  faith,  every  clause,  word, 
and  sentence  taught  by  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  his  Apostles, 
and  Prophets,  in  the  New  and  Old  Testament,  and  all  articles 
explicate  and  set  forth  in  the  general  councils."  Could  it  be  that 
Cranmer  was  going  over  again  in  brief  the  history  of  his  mental 
development?  His  previous  recantations  had  carried  him  back 
to  the  state  of  belief  in  his  youth,  but  they  had  not  represented 
any  deep  change  of  conviction,  and  now  it  seemed  that  the  revul- 
sion had  already  begun.  Gradually  he  began  to  recover  lost 
ground,  and  in  this  seventh  recantation  there  is  nothing  incon- 
sistent with  his  position  under  Henry  VIII  after  the  breach  with 
Rome. 

But  the  process  did  not  stop  here  in  a  halfway  house,  and  a 
further  mental  struggle  ensued  during  the  night  between  this 
recantation  and  the  dawn  of  his  dying  day.  Of  that  night  of 
agony  we  have  no  record,  but  it  needs  none  to  depict  the  depth 
of  Cranmer's  conflicting  emotions,  his  shame  and  humiliation,  his 
dread  of  approaching  torture  and  of  the  yet  more  dark  hereafter, 
his  intense  desire  to  salve  his  conscience,  and  his  aching  to  be  at 
peace.  The  papist  tractarian  tells  us  that  he  sought  comfort  in  the 
Penitential  Psalms,  but  we  may  be  sure  that  petitions  from  his  own 
great  Litany  sprang  no  less  readily  to  his  lips :  "  that  it  may 
please  Thee  to  succour,  help,  and  comfort  all  that  be  in  danger, 
necessity,  and  tribulation  .  .  .  and  to  show  Thy  pity  upon  all 
prisoners  and  captives ;  .  .  .  that  it  may  please  Thee  to  bring  into 
the  way  of  truth  all  such  as  have  erred  and  are  deceived  .  .  . 
that  it  may  please  Thee  to  strengthen  such  as  do  stand,  and  to 
comfort  and  help  the  weak-hearted,  and  to  raise  up  them  that 
fall,  and  finally  to  beat  down  Satan  under  our  feet." 

§  9.    The  Last  Day 

The  morning  broke  in  a  storm  of  rain,  and  the  crowds  which 
thronged  St.  Mary's  came  out  to  see  a  reed  shaken  with  the  wind. 


292  English  Historians 

• 

The  reed  was  bent  and  sorely  bruised,  but  it  was  not  broken  yet; 
even  now  it  might  be  fashioned*into  a  rod.  To  St.  Mary's  Cranmer 
was  led  in  procession  between  two  friars,  and  as  they  approached 
the  doors  a  significant  Nunc  Dimittis  was  raised.  Inside,  Cran- 
mer was  placed  on  a  stage  opposite  the  pulpit,  from  which  Dr. 
Cole  was  to  preach  a  sermon.  Cranmer  had  given  no  sign  to 
Cole  or  the  friars  who  visited  him  in  the  morning,  but  he  had  told 
a  poor  woman,  on  whom  he  bestowed  some  money,  that  he  would 
sooner  have  the  prayers  of  a  good  layman  than  those  of  a  bad 
priest.  That  boded  ill  for  his  final  profession,  and  both  Romanists 
and  Reformers  passed  from  hope  to  fear  and  from  fear  to  hope 
as  they  witnessed  Cranmer's  demeanor.  He  was  made  the 
touchstone  of  truth,  and  his  foes  themselves  had  determined  that 
his  conduct  should  test  the  strength  of  the  two  forms  of  faith. 

He  stood  there,  "an  image  of  sorrow,"  while  Cole  delivered  his 
not  unmerciful  sermon.  With  more  kindliness  than  consistency 
he  recalled  for  Cranmer's  comfort  the  fate  of  the  three  faithful 
children  of  Israel,  who  refused  to  bow  before  the  false  god  which 
the  king  had  set  up,  and  passed  through  the  fire  unscathed.  When 
he  had  ended  he  asked  them  all  to  pray  for  the  contrite  sinner. 
Cranmer  knelt  with  the  congregation.  Then  he  rose  and  gave 
thanks  for  their  prayers,  and  began  to  read  from  a  paper  he  held 
in  his  hand.  It  was  his  seventh  recantation  —  amended.  First 
came  a  prayer,  —  "the  last  and  sublimest  of  his  prayers,"  —  then 
followed  four  exhortations.  He  besought  his  hearers  to  care  less 
for  this  world  and  more  for  God  and  the  world  to  come;  to  obey 
the  king  and  queen,  not  for  fear  of  them  only,  but  much  more  for 
the  fear  of  God,  for  whosoever  resisted  them  resisted  God's  ordi- 
nance; to  love  one  another  like  brothers  and  sisters  and  do  good 
to  all  men ;  and  finally  he  reminded  the  rich  how  hard  it  was  for 
them  to  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  moved  them  to  charity, 
for  what  was  given  to  the  poor  was  given  to  God. 

"  And  now,"  he  went  on,  "  forasmuch  as  I  have  come  to  the 
last  end  of  my  life,  whereupon  hangeth  all  my  life  past  and  all 
my  life  to  come,  either  to  live  with  my  Saviour  Christ  for  ever  in 
joy,  or  else  to  be  in  pains  ever  with  the  wicked  devils  in  hell; 
and  I  see  before  mine  eyes  presently  either  heaven  ready  to  re- 
ceive me,  or  else  hell  ready  to  swallow  me  up :  I  shall  therefore 
declare  unto  you  my  faith  without  colour  or  dissimulation;  for 
now  is  no  time  to  dissemble  whatsoever  I  have  written  in  time 
past." 

Then  Cranmer   began  the  real   work   of  that  day.     Having 


The   Last   Days  of  Archbishop   Cranmer        293 

recited  the  Lord's  Prayer  in  English,  he  began  the  profession  of 
faith  contained  in  the  seventh  recantation;  but  now  he  declared 
no  unlimited  belief  in  general  councils.  He  had  completely  re- 
covered the  ground  lost  in  his  recantations  and  regained  the  posi- 
tion of  1552.  If  his  audience  perceived  the  drift  of  these  changes, 
the  tension  must  have  grown  almost  unbearable.  The  climax 
was  reached;  his  trial  was  over,  his  triumph  began. 

"  And  now  I  come  to  the  great  thing  that  so  troubleth  my 
conscience,  more  than  any  other  thing  that  I  said  or  did  in  my 
life:  and  that  is  my  setting  abroad  of  writings  contrary  to  the 
truth,  which  here  now  I  renounce  and  refuse  as  things  written 
with  my  hand  contrary  to  the  truth  which  I  thought  in  my  heart, 
and  written  for  fear  of  death,  and  to  save  my  life,  if  it  might  be; 
and  that  is  all  such  bills  which  I  have  'written  or  signed  with 
mine  own  hand  since  my  degradation;  wherein  I  have  written 
many  things  untrue.  And  forasmuch  as  my  hand  offended  in 
writing  contrary  to  my  heart,  it  shall  be  first  burned.  And  as  for 
the  Pope,  I  refuse  him  as  Christ's  enemy  and  Antichrist,  with  all 
his  false  doctrine.  And  as  for  the  Sacrament  — 

He  got  no  farther;  his  foes  had  been  dumb  with  amazement, 
but  now  their  pent-up  feelings  broke  loose.  "Stop  the  heretic's 
mouth!"  cried  Cole;  "take  him  away!"  "Play  the  Christian 
man,"  said  Lord  Williams;  "remember  your  recantations  and 
do  not  dissemble."  "Alas!  my  lord,"  replied  Cranmer,  "I  have 
been  a  man  that  all  my  life  loved  plainness  and  never  dissembled 
till  now  against  the  truth,  which  I  am  most  sorry  for";  and  he 
seized  the  occasion  to  add  that  as  for  the  sacrament  he  believed 
as  he  had  taught  in  his  book  against  the  Bishop  of  Winchester. 
The  tumult  redoubled.  Cranmer  was  dragged  from  the  stage 
and  led  out  towards  the  stake. 

There  was  no  need  of  a  spur  for  his  lagging  steps.  His  desire 
was  now  to  be  gone.  He  had  done  with  the  quicksands  of  logic, 
legal  formulas,  and  constitutional  maxims,  and  had  gained  a 
foothold  in  conscience.  The  fight  had  been  long  and  bitter,  but 
he  had  reached  a  conclusion  at  length ;  he  had  ' '  professed  a  good 
profession  before  many  witnesses."  The  Reformation  would 
not  be  shamed  in  him,  and  the  gates  of  hell  should  not  prevail 
against  it.  Over  it,  as  over  his  own  ashes,  he  would  write  the 
legend  Res ur gam.  Eagerly  he  pressed  forward  to  the  scene  of  his 
final  victory,  and  the  friars  could  scarcely  keep  pace.  Through 
Brasenose  Lane  and  out  of  the  gate  by  St.  Michael's  they  sped  to 
a  spot  in  the  present  Broad  Street  in  front  of  Balliol  College ;  there 


294  English   Historians 

Ridley  and  Latimer  had  suffered  six  months  before,  and  now  it 
is  marked  by  a  plain  stone  cross  in  the  ground. 

The  friars  ceased  not  to  ply  him  with  exhortations.  "Die  not 
in  desperation,"  cried  one;  "Thou  wilt  drag  innumerable  souls 
to  hell,"  said  another.  But  Cranmer  was  out  of  their  reach;  it 
was  not  to  perdition  that  he  thought  those  souls  would  go.  Cheer- 
fully he  put  off  his  upper  garments  and  stood  in  his  shirt,  which 
reached  to  the  ground.  There  was  no  hair  on  his  head,  but  a 
long  white  beard  flowed  over  his  breast.  He  was  then  bound  to 
the  stake  with  a  steel  band,  and  light  was  set  to  the  hundred  and 
fifty  fagots  of  furze  and  the  hundred  fagots  of  wood  which  made 
up  his  funeral  pyre.  As  the  flames  leaped  up,  he  stretched  out 
his  right  hand,  saying  with  a  loud  voice,  "This  hand  hath  of- 
fended," and  held  it  steadfastly  in  the  fire  until  it  was  burnt  to 
ashes.  Thus  openly  did  he  proclaim  his  faith  by  the  gesture  in 
which  the  mind  of  posterity  paints  him.  No  one  could  falsify 
that  recantation ;  it  was  a  sign  which  none  could  misread.  His 
body  might  perish;  but  his  cause  was  won.  He  saw  the  travail 
of  his  soul,  and  was  satisfied. 

"His  patience  in  the  torment,"  writes  a  hostile  eye-witness,  "his 
courage  in  dying,  if  it  had  been  taken  either  for  the  glory  of  God, 
the  wealth  of  his  country,  or  the  testimony  of  truth,  as  it  was 
for  a  pernicious  error,  and  subversion  of  true  religion,  I  could 
worthily  have  commended  the  example,  and  matched  it  with  the 
fame  of  any  father  of  ancient  time." 

No  cry  escaped  his  lips,  no  movement  betrayed  his  pain  save 
that  once  with  his  unburnt  hand  he  wiped  his  forehead.  The 
flames  might  scorch  and  consume  his  flesh,  but  his  spirit  had  found 
repose ;  for  conscience  had  ceased  to  torment,  and  a  peace  which 
passed  understanding  pervaded  his  soul. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Gairdner,  A  History  of  the  English  Church  in  the  Sixteenth  Century, 
chaps,  xvi-xix.  Stone,  History  of  Queen  Mary,  a  recent  work  by  a  Catholic 
writer.  Froude,  History  oj  England,  Vol.  VI,  chap,  xxxiii. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  ELIZABETHAN   SETTLEMENT  IN  THE  CHURCH 

IT  is  difficult  to  estimate  the  forces  which  swept  England  into 
Protestantism  after  the  Catholic  reaction  was  broken  by  the 
death  of  Queen  Mary.  The  entire  Tudor  period  needs  a  treat- 
ment comparable  to  that  which  Mr.  Gardiner  gave  the  portion  of 
the  seventeenth  century  covered  in  his  great  works.  The  sudden 
ecclesiastical  oscillations  will  be  understood  only  when  a  detailed 
and  patient  analysis  is  made.  At  all  events,  we  do  know  that  the 
State  which  had  adopted  the  Catholic  faith  with  apparent  readiness 
in  1553  turned  to  the  established  Protestant  faith  with  the  same 
readiness  five  years  later. 

§  i.    The  Opening  of  Elizabeth' 's  First  Parliament1 

Ten  days  after  her  coronation,  Elizabeth  returned  to  West- 
minster to  open  her  first  Parliament.  The  two  houses  assembled 
themselves  within  the  Abbey  to  hear  the  accustomed  mass  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  but  found  that  the  mass  had  been  sung  early  that 
morning,  without  the  elevation.  The  Queen  arrived  at  the  Abbey, 
after  a  midday  dinner,  in  her  ordinary  open  litter,  accompanied 
by  the  court  in  their  coronation  robes.  She  had  been  turning 
and  smiling  to  the  people,  with  "gramercy,  good  people,"  all 
the  way,  in  answer  to  shouts  of  "God  save  and  maintain  thee." 
The  bishops  were  in  her  train.  At  the  Abbey  door  the  Abbot 
Feckenham,  with  all  his  monks  in  procession,  each  having  a  lighted 
torch  in  his  hand,  received  her  with  incense  and  holy  water;  but 
when  she  saw  the  torches  she  exclaimed,  "Away  with  those  torches, 
for  we  see  very  well."  Her  choristers  uplifted  the  Litany  in 
English,  and  she  was  accompanied  to  the  high  altar  under  her 

1  Dixon,  History  of  the  Church  of  England,  Vol.  V,  pp.  51  ff.  By  per- 
mission of  the  Delegates  of  the  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford. 

295 


296  English  Historians 

canopy.  Not  a  bishop,  but  a  returned  exile  ascended  the  pulpit; 
not  an  indifferently  chosen  returned  exile,  but  he  who  had  been 
dean  of  Westminster  before  Feckenham  was  abbot,  whom 
Feckenham  had  displaced ;  not  any  other  pulpit  ascended  he  than 
that  from  which  a  little  time  ago  had  sounded  from  the  lips  of 
Bishop  White  of  Winchester  the  funeral  oration  of  Mary ;  and 
both  White  and  Feckenham  were  compelled  to  abide  the  eloquence 
of  Dr.  Cox.  The  conqueror  of  Frankfort  and  of  Knox  was 
equal  to  himself.  For  an  hour  and  a  half  he  held  the  audience 
spellbound,  denouncing  the  iniquities  of  monks  and  the  persecu- 
tion in  which  so  many  innocent  persons  had  been  burnt  under 
pretence  of  heresy;  praising  the  queen  and  exhorting  her  no 
longer  to  tolerate  the  past  iniquities,  but  to  put  down  images  and 
monasteries.  At  the  end  of  this  sermon  the  queen  proceeded  to 
the  House  of  Lords,  and  the  business  of  the  session  was  begun 
by  the  new  Lord  Chancellor  Bacon  in  an  elaborate  oration,  dealing 
with  three  great  matters,  —  the  reformation  of  religion,  the  miti- 
gation of  the  penal  laws,  the  supplies.  He  exhorted  to  uniformity, 
spoke  in  a  masterly  manner  of  the  imperfection  and  abuse  of  laws, 
and  lamented  the  necessities  of  the  sovereign  whose  graces  he  was 
insufficient  to  extol.  To  the  measures  to  be  taken  for  such  a 
settlement  he  seemed  to  predict  opposition  when  he  deprecated 
contumelious  words,  as  heretic,  schismatic,  papist,  which  he 
termed  the  nurses  of  seditious  factions  and  sects.  He  seemed  to 
indicate  the  sort  of  opposition  to  be  feared  when  he  exhorted  them 
in  that  assembly  to  avoid  "all  sophistical,  captious,  and  frivolous 
arguments  and  quiddities,  meeter  for  ostentation  of  wit  than 
consultation  of  weighty  matters,  comelier  for  scholars  than  coun- 
sellors, more  beseeming  for  schools  than  for  Parliament  houses." 
The  Parliament  which  was  opened  with  this  preamble  recovered 
tenths  and  firstfruits  to  the  crown,  declared  the  royal  supremacy 
in  a  new  statute,  expelled  the  pope  once  more  from  England,  was 
illustrated  by  the  arguments  of  prelates,  and  was  suspended  to 
listen  to  a  theological  debate  in  Westminster  Abbey.  It  was 
accompanied  by  a  remarkable  convocation;  it  was  dissolved  in 
May. 

§  2.  Early  Acts  of  Parliament 

No  Tudor  House  of  Commons  but  was  packed;  this  was  an 
assembly  of  nominees  of  the  crown.  The  first  thing  that  it  did 
was  to  restore  firstfruits  and  tenths,  and  the  patronage  of  all  im- 
propriate  livings  to  the  crown,  and  to  erect  again  the  courts  of 


The   Elizabethan  Settlement  in   the  Church        297 

firstfruits  and  augmentations,  undoing  the  righteous  work  of 
Mary  in  a  very  hypocritical  strain.  They  preluded  that  they 
"conceived  at  the  bottom  of  their  hearts  great  sorrow  and  heavi- 
ness when  they  called  to  remembrance  the  huge,  innumerable, 
and  inestimable  charges  of  the  royal  estate  and  imperial  crown  of 
this  realm";  that  her  Majesty's  dearest  sister  the  late  queen  had 
restored  goods  to  the  Church  "upon  certain  zealous  and  incon- 
venient respects,  not  sufficiently  nor  politically  enough  weighing 
the  matter."  All  the  bishops  present  and  an  abbot,  Feckenham, 
were  dissentient  from  this  act :  the  puisne  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  and 
in  ascending  order  the  Bishops  of  Chester,  Exeter,  Coventry, 
Llandaff,  Worcester,  London,  and  York;  all  lay  lords  were  for  it. 
Another  act  supplemented  or  developed  it,  enabling  the  queen, 
whose  necessities  were  again  deplored,  to  take  in  possession  on 
every  avoidance  as  much  of  the  lands  of  the  see  as  the  yearly 
value  of  her  tenths  and  impropriate  parsonages  within  the  see  came 
to.  This  measure  is  reckoned  a  great  starting-point  in  eccle- 
siastical property.  It  went  through  the  Commons  with  diffi- 
culty late  in  the  session.  The  next  necessity  was  the  recognition 
of  the  queen's  title,  a  declaration  that  she  was  the  heir  to  the 
crown,  lawfully  descended  from  the  blood  royal.  In  this  neither 
was  the  validity  of  Anne  Boleyn's  marriage  affirmed,  nor  the 
former  act  against  the  legitimacy  of  Anne  Boleyn's  daughter 
repealed;  dignity  was  consulted  by  neither  reflecting  implicitly 
in  such  a  manner  on  the  memory  of  the  father  nor  on  the  birth  of 
the  sister  of  the  queen ;  the  assembly  was  spared  the  pain  of  cen- 
suring the  work  of  predecessors,  and  the  adhesion  of  the  bishops 
was  secured.  Another  act  made  it  treason  to  depose  the  queen ; 
another  extended  to  freedom  of  speech  against  her  the  same  penal- 
ties of  pillory,  loss  of  ears,  loss  of  hand,  which  had  been  ordained 
for  the  protection  of  Philip  and  Mary. 

§  3.    The  Passing  of  the  Monks 

Another,  a  private  act  of  Elizabeth's  first  Parliament,  annexed 
again  to  the  crown  the  religious  houses  refounded  so  laboriously 
by  Mary,  the  inhabitants  began  to  disperse,  and  the  final  dissolution 
of  the  monasteries  occupied  the  summer.  Pensions  awaited  those 
who  would  renounce  their  profession  and  accept  the  oath  against 
foreign  jurisdiction;  but  some  departed,  some  passed  the  seas, 
before  the  application  of  the  statute.  The  Spanish  ambassador, 
De  Feria,  who  quitted  the  country  in  May,  in  his  final  interview 


298  English   Historians 

with  the  queen  pathetically  requested  as  a  parting  gift  a  passport 
to  carry  them  all  with  him  to  Flanders;  but,  instead  of  a  train  of 
monks,  nuns,  and  friars,  he  bore  away  a  beautiful  English  bride, 
and  after  his  departure  the  queen's  concession  was  limited  to  those 
religious  persons  who  had  been  living  in  the  time  of  the  great  sup- 
pression of  monasteries,  of  whom  but  few  were  left.  The  greater 
part  of  the  rest  remained  in  the  kingdom.  The  Black  Monks 
of  Westminster  were  said  to  have  "changed  their  coats,"  the  most 
of  them,  by  the  end  of  May.  Their  abbot,  Feckenham,  a  man  of 
wealth  and  benevolence,  passed  into  private  life,  spreading  benefits 
wherever  he  dwelt.  The  Friars  Observant  of  Greenwich  were  dis- 
charged in  June;  in  July  the  Black  Friars  of  Smithfield,  the  nuns 
of  Sion,  and  the  monks  of  the  Charterhouse.  So  passed  away  the 
last  survivors  of  the  religious  life  in  England. 

§  4.    The  Establishment  of  Royal  Supremacy 

The  great  religious  enactments  of  this  Parliament,  the  Acts  of 
Supremacy  and  Uniformity,  vast  and  permanent,  the  base  of  the 
whole  ecclesiastical  legislation  of  the  reign,  took  their  beginning 
in  the  House  of  Commons.  The  House  prepared  itself  by  reli- 
gious exercises.  On  Ash  Wednesday,  February  8,  they  adjourned 
to  hear  a  sermon  which  was  preached  before  the  court  by  the 
favorite  orator,  Dr.  Cox.  On  the  following  Saturday  the  Eng- 
lish Litany  was  said  by  the  clerk  of  the  House  kneeling,  and  an- 
swered by  the  whole  House  on  their  knees  with  divers  prayers. 
The  next  time  that  they  met,  Monday,  February  13,  they  had  the 
second  reading  of  the  first  draft  of  a  bill  "for  annexing  the  suprem- 
acy to  the  crown."  A  great  debate  ensued,  and  the  bill  was 
dashed ;  a  new  bill  was  drawn,  and  after  many  arguments  passed 
the  House,  February  25.  This  was  the  act  which  stands  among 
statutes  with  the  title  of  "An  act  to  restore  to  the  crown  the  an- 
cient jurisdiction  over  the  estate  ecclesiastical  and  spiritual,  and 
abolishing  all  foreign  power  repugnant  to  the  same."  It  repealed 
the  great  statute  of  Philip  and  Mary  which  revived  the  papal 
jurisdiction,  by  which  it  is  said  that  "the  subjects  were  eftsoons 
brought  under  an  usurped  foreign  power  and  authority,  and  did 
yet  remain  in  that  bondage."  It  repealed  the  reenacted  statutes 
of  heresy  of  the  same  reign.  It  revived  ten  great  statutes  of 
Henry  the  Eighth  specifically,  and  on  the  other  hand  it  confirmed 
the  repeal  of  all  the  other  laws  of  Henry  which  had  been  repealed 
by  Philip  and  Mary.  The  effect  of  this  confirmation  of  repeal 


The  Elizabethan  Settlement  in  the  Church       299 

was  to  annul  the  title  of  supreme  head,  and  at  the  same  time  to 
render  necessary  some  new  machinery  to  secure  the  royal  su- 
premacy in  things  ecclesiastical.  Supreme  head  died  irksomely. 
Not  having  been  assumed  by  the  queen  in  the  writs  for  this  Par- 
liament, the  first  question  that  engaged  the  Commons  when  they 
met  was  whether  through  this  omission  the  writs  had  been  well 
issued  and  the  Parliament  were  to  be  held.  They  decided  it  on 
the  precedent  of  Mary's  own  Parliaments,  which  had  been  well 
summoned,  though  Mary  latterly  omitted  the  title;  and  they 
silently  dismissed  the  tasteless  denomination  which  had  done  so 
much  to  perplex  history.  They  proceeded  to  abolish  all  usurped 
and  foreign  jurisdiction,  to  unite  to  the  crown  all  jurisdiction  visi- 
tatorial or  corrective  that  had  been  or  might  lawfully  be  exercised 
by  any  spiritual  power  or  authority,  and  to  authorize  the  queen 
to  exercise  by  commissioners,  whom  she  might  assign,  the  power 
thus  recognized.  The  commissioners,  who  might  be  appointed, 
were  to  adjudge  no  matters  to  be  heresy  but  upon  the  authority 
of  the  canonical  Scriptures,  of  the  first  four  general  councils,  of 
any  other  general  council  acting  on  the  plain  words  of  the  canoni- 
cal Scriptures,  or  such  matter  as  should  thereafter  be  determined 
to  be  heresy  by  the  high  court  of  Parliament  with  the  assent  of  the 
clergy  in  convocation.  Such  was  the  origin  of  the  celebrated 
court  of  high  commission.  This  statute  was  penal;  it  made 
maintenance  of  foreign  authority  treason  for  the  third  offence.  It 
contained  a  form  of  oath  in  which  the  queen  was  acknowledged, 
more  properly  than  supreme  head,  supreme  governor  of  the  realm 
as  well  in  all  spiritual  or  ecclesiastical  things  or  causes  as  in  tem- 
poral. This  oath,  which  was  presently  to  play  an  important  part 
in  history,  simply  denied  the  jurisdiction  of  any  foreign  power  or 
person,  without  mention  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome.  It  may  be 
added  that  the  act  ended  with  a  provision  for  a  pending  appeal  to 
Rome  "from  a  pretenced  sentence  given  in  consistory  in  Paul's" 
by  Pole's  judges  delegate  by  legatine  authority  —  a  matrimonial 
cause,  which  was  characteristically  settled  thus :  If  Rome  gave 
answer  within  threescore  days,  Rome's  answer  should  be  allowed 
to  supersede  Pole's  sentence  and  stand  good;  but  if  Rome  gave 
no  answer  within  threescore  days,  Richard  and  Agnes  might 
transfer  their  appeal  against  Pole's  sentence  to  the  court  of  the  arch- 
bishop within  the  realm. 


300  English  Historians 

§  5.    The  Act  for  Uniformity 

The  other  main  statute  of  this  Parliament,  the  Act  for  Uniformity, 
restored  the  English  service  of  King  Edward  the  Sixth  with  a  few 
specified  alterations.  It  was  brought  into  the  Commons,  Janu- 
ary 20,  by  which  time  it  may  perhaps  be  concluded  that  the  revision 
of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  had  been  finished  in  Sir  Thomas 
Smith's  house ;  it  was  expedited  in  about  three  months.  This  act 
was  made,  the  most  part,  out  of  the  two  former  Acts  for  Unifor- 
mity: of  the  first  of  Edward,  which  was  clerical  as  to  penalties 
(the  reader  may  be  reminded),  and  trod  on  the  layman  only  who 
openly  depraved  the  English  service  by  interludes,  ballads,  or  con- 
temptuous words;  of  the  second  of  Edward,  which  extended  pen- 
alty to  all  lay  people  whatever  offending,  whether  they  merely 
refused  to  come  to  their  churches,  or  were  present  at  any  other 
form  of  service.  Skill,  prudence,  and  severity  marked  the  com- 
bination. As  to  the  clergy,  the  penalties  laid  against  them  re- 
mained unaltered,  since  it  was  scarcely  possible  to  increase  them; 
as  to  the  open  depravers,  the  fines  of  ten  and  twenty  pounds  for 
the  first  and  second  offences  were  raised  enormously  to  one  hun- 
dred and  four  hundred  marks;  it  was  scarcely  possible  to  in- 
crease the  penalty  of  the  third.  But  the  simple  layman  who 
would  not  go  to  church  found  himself  also  in  harder  case  than 
before.  By  Edward's  second  Act  for  Uniformity  he  was  liable  to 
ecclesiastical  censures;  by  (his  act  he  was  made  liable  furthermore 
to  a  fine  of  a  shilling  a  Sunday,  an  abominable  exaction.  On  the 
other  hand  he  was  not  pursued  so  far  by  this  act  as  by  Edward's 
act  if  he  chose  to  frequent  some  other  manner  of  service,  for  such 
an  offence  was  not  named.  He  was  not  pursued  to  his  coventicle, 
if  he  had  one,  but  the  clauses  of  Edward's  act  in  that  behalf  were 
omitted.  If  the  significance  of  this  had  been  perceived,  if  it 
had  become  known  on  all  sides  that  the  layman  might  go  where  he 
would  on  other  days,  provided  that  he  went  to  his  church  on  Sun- 
days and  holy  days,  it  might  have  made  a  difference  in  history. 

The  ordinaries  and  the  justices  were  conjoined,  as  before,  in  the 
execution  of  these  very  enactments,  and  the  solemn  adjuration, 
which  Edward's  latter  act  contains,  of  the  queen,  the  lords  tem- 
poral, and  the  Commons  to  the  archbishops,  bishops,  and  other 
ordinaries  to  do  their  duty,  was  repeated.  It  has  caused  some 
searchings  of  heart;  nor  less  the  following  clause,  also  borrowed 
from  Edward,  in  which  the  ordinaries  were  empowered  under 
the  same  authority,  "  by  this  act  to  reform  and  punish  by  censures 


The  Elizabethan  Settlement  in  the  Church       301 

of  the  Church."  The  purport  of  this  act  was  to  restore  the  Second 
Prayer  Book,  the  book  that  was  "  authorized  by  Parliament  in  the 
fifth  and  sixth  year"  of  the  reign  of  Edward.  The  various  ser- 
vices and  offices  were  ordered  to  be  said  and  used  in  the  manner 
and  form  of  the  Second  Book;  but  my  reader  may  remind  him- 
self that  if  this  third  Act  for  Uniformity  restored  the  Second  Book 
of  Edward,  the  second  Act  for  Uniformity  authorized  his  First 
Book.  There  has  been  but  one  English  Service  Book  throughout. 
This  act  restored  Edward's  revision  of  the  book,  with  several 
alterations,  carefully  specified,  made  doubtless  by  Smith  and  his 
theologians.  They  were,  "certain  lessons  to  be  used  on  every 
Sunday  in  the  year,  the  form  of  the  Litany  altered  and  corrected, 
and  two  sentences  only  added  in  the  delivery  of  the  sacrament  to 
the  communicants,  and  none  other  or  otherwise."  For  the  rest, 
some  curious  points  may  be  noted  in  this  act.  It  omitted  all 
mention  of  the  English  ordinal,  which  the  second  Act  for  Uniform- 
ity had  expressly  and  formally  added  to  the  Prayer  Book  as  of 
the  same  authority,  and  which  had  not  been  included  in  the  first 
act  because  it  was  not  ready  at  the  time.  This  legislative 
omission  was  artfully  or  naturally  misunderstood,  and  gave 
rise  in  time  to  no  small  trouble.  The  act  ended  with  two  mem- 
orable provisions  peculiar  to  itself.  The  one  was  a  rubric,  if  it 
may  be  called  so,  the  first  form  of  the  highly  contentious  rubric, 
which  now  stands  in  the  Prayer  Book,  concerning  the  ornaments 
of  the  Church  and  of  the  minister.  Instead  of  restoring  the 
rubric  of  Edward's  Second  Book,  that  the  minister  should  never 
wear  alb,  vestment,  or  cope,  it  ordered  that  all  such  ornaments 
as  were  in  the  second  year  of  Edward  should  be  retained  and  be 
in  use  until  other  order  should  be  taken  by  the  queen's  authority 
with  the  advice  of  the  commissioners  who  were  to  be  appointed, 
or  of  the  metropolitan  of  the  realm.  The  other  was  a  reservation 
which  afterwards  bore  some  sorry  fruit,  that  in  case  of  misuse  or 
irreverence  in  the  ceremonies  or  rites  of  the  Church,  the  queen 
with  the  like  advisers  might  ordain  further  rites  and  ceremonies. 
These  respective  clauses  were  the  first  indication  of  the  kind  of 
work  to  be  done  by  these  commissioners.  The  secondary  mention 
of  the  metropolitan  may  be  noted,  but  at  least  he  was  there.  St. 
John's  day,  June  24,  was  appointed  for  the  inuring  of  the  act  and 
of  the  English  service. 


302  English  Historians 

§  6.   Catholic  Arguments  against  the  New  Law  on  Royal 
Supremacy 

These  two  great  acts,  one  of  which  put  out  the  pope  and  the 
other  the  Latin  service,  were  boldly  opposed  by  the  Romanen- 
sian  prelates.  All  dissented  from  them,  and  several  spoke  against 
them.  Archbishop  Heath,  whose  learning  and  piety  we  have  so 
often  admired,  gave  forth  a  laborious  prelection  upon  the  former 
of  them,  concerning  the  supremacy,  which  was  perhaps  unequal 
to  his  reputation.  "You  are  by  this  bill,"  said  he,  "forsaking  the 
See  of  Rome.  Is  there  no  inconvenience  and  danger  in  that? 
You  are  giving  a  supremacy,  consisting  of  spiritual  government, 
to  the  queen.  Have  you  authority  to  grant  this;  or  has  she 
capacity  to  receive  it  ?  If  you  meant  only  to  withdraw  obedience 
from  the  present  Pope  Paul  the  Fourth,  who  has  shown  himself  a 
very  austere  stern  father  to  us  ever  since  his  entrance  into  Peter's 
chair,  then  the  cause  were  not  of  so  much  importance.  But  by 
relinquishing  the  See  of  Rome  we  must  forsake  all  general  coun- 
cils, all  canonical  and  ecclesiastical  laws  of  the  Church  of  Christ, 
the  judgment  of  all  other  princes,  and  the  unity  of  Christ's  Church. 
By  leaping  out  of  Peter's  ship  we  hazard  ourselves  to  be  drowned 
in  the  waters  of  schism,  sects,  and  divisions.  As  to  the  general 
councils,  the  first  four,  of  Nice,  Constantinople,  Ephesus,  and 
Chalcedon,  in  various  ways  acknowledged  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
to  be  their  chief  head;  therefore  to* deny  the  See  Apostolic  is  to  set 
at  naught  their  judgments.  As  to  ecclesiastical  laws,  they  wholly 
depend  on  the  authority  of  the  See  Apostolic,  and  cannot  bind  the 
universal  Church  without  it.  As  to  other  princes,  neither  Protes- 
tant nor  Catholic  agree  with  these  our  doings,  for  none  of  them 
ever  took  such  a  title  as  Henry  the  Eighth  did.  Whether  are  your 
wisdoms  about  to  advise  the  queen  to  follow  the  example  of  King 
Uzziah  who  burned  incense,  or  of  King  David  who  would  not 
touch  the  ark? 

"  We  have  as  humble  and  godly  a  mistress  to  reign  over  us  as  ever 
had  English  people,  if  that  we  do  not  seduce  and  beguile  her  by 
our  flattery  and  dissimulation.  As  to  the  unity  of  Christ's  Church, 
by  leaping  out  of  Peter's  ship  we  must,  I  say,  be  overwhelmed  with 
the  waters  of  schism,  sects,  and  divisions.  St.  Cyprian  says  that 
the  unity  of  Christ's  Church  depends  upon  the  unity  of  Peter's 
authority,  and  that  all  heresies,  sects,  and  schisms  do  spring  for 
that  men  will  not  be  obedient  to  the  head  bishop  of  God.  Flee- 
ing from  the  unity  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  we  must  grant  that  the 


The  Elizabethan  Settlement  in  the  Church       303 

Church  of  Rome  is  either  of  God  or  else  a  malignant  Church. 
If  of  God,  where  Christ  is  truly  taught  and  the  sacraments  rightly 
administered,  how  can  we  disburden  ourselves  of  forsaking  that 
Church  with  which  we  ought  to  be  one  and  not  to  admit  any 
separation  ?  If  you  answer  that  it  is  a  malignant  Church,  then  we 
of  this  realm  have  never  received  any  benefit  of  Christ,  since  we 
have  received  no  gospel,  no  faith,  no  sacraments  other  than  were 
sent  us  from  Rome.  Holy  Eleutherius  sent  Faganus  and  Dami- 
anus  in  the  time  of  King  Lucius.  Holy  Gregory  sent  Augustine 
and  Mellitus.  And  now  Paulus  Tertius  lately  sent  Cardinal  Pole 
to  restore  the  faith  which  Eleutherius  and  Gregory  planted.  If 
the  Church  of  Rome  be  a  malignant  Church,  we  have  been  de- 
ceived ;  for  the  doctrine  must  be  of  the  nature  of  the  Church  whence 
it  comes.  Now,  with  regard  to  this  supremacy  and  spiritual  gov- 
ernment. Have  you  power  to  say  to  the  queen  Tibi  dabo  claves  ? 
Have  you  power  to  bid  her  Pasce,  pasce,  pasce  ?  Have  you  power 
by  act  of  Parliament  to  bid  her  Confirma  tuos  fratres  ?  Can  you 
empower  her  to  excommunicate  and  minister  spiritual  punishment  ? 
Can  you  make  a  woman  supreme  head  of  the  Church?"  Thus 
Heath,  arguing  as  if  the  title  of  supreme  head  had  been  to  be 
renewed  by  Parliament  instead  of  taken  away,  and  as  if  the 
supremacy  had  been  now  wrongfully  transferred  from  a  foreign 
personage  who  never  had  it,  and  newly  given  to  the  English  sov- 
ereign; whereas  the  act  only  professed  "to  restore  to  the  crown 
the  ancient  jurisdiction  over  the  estate  ecclesiastical  and  spiritual." 
Bishop  Scot  of  Chester  also  spoke  against  the  bill  on  the  third 
reading.  "I  reverence,"  said  he,  "the  work  of  the  noblemen 
to  whom  this  bill  has  been  committed;  Treasurer  Winchester,  the 
Duke  of  Norfolk,  the  Earls  of  Westmoreland,  Shrewsbury,  Rut- 
land, Sussex,  and  Pembroke,  the  Marquis  Montague,  Lords  Clin- 
ton, Morley,  Rich,  Willoughby,  and  North,  and  the  Bishops  of 
Exeter  and  Carlisle;  for  there  is  nothing  in  the  bill  as  to  altering 
the  service  in  the  Church,  and  the  due  administration  of  the  holy 
sacraments ;  they  will  not  suffer  it ;  and  they  have  mitigated  the  ex- 
treme penalties  mentioned  in  the  bill  for  gainsayers  for  their 
charity  and  pity  toward  the  poor  clergy  of  this  realm.  But  unity 
is  to  be  maintained  in  the  Church,  as  order  and  concord  in  the 
civil  State.  Every  village  has  one  constable,  every  hundred  one 
head  constable,  every  shire  one  sheriff.  All  the  constables  are 
under  the  head  constable,  all  the  head  constables  are  under  the 
sheriff,  and  all  the  sheriffs  are  under  the  prince.  So  in  the 
Church.  Every  village  has  a  priest,  every  city  has  a  bishop,  every 


304  English  Historians 

province  has  a  metropolitan.  All  the  priests  are  under  the  bishop, 
all  the  bishops  are  under  the  metropolitan,  and  all  the  metropoli- 
tans are  under  the  pope. 

"  Head  governor  of  the  Church  cannot  be  applied  to  any  tem- 
poral prince.  Our  Saviour  Christ  neither  gave  spiritual  authority 
to  princes  nor  diminished  their  temporal  authority.  It  will  be 
objected  against  me  that  the  texts  that  I  have  quoted  to  this  end, 
against  the  supremacy  of  princes,  make  nothing  for  the  primacy 
of  Peter;  that  the  texts  concerning  Peter  refer  to  the  other  Apostles 
equally,  or  refer  to  him  alone  and  not  to  his  successors.  But  con- 
sider this,  that  the  succession  of  Peter  alone  continues  in  the 
Church,  not  the  succession  of  any  of  the  other  Apostles;  that  the 
same  dangers  of  infidelity  and  heresy  that  were  in  Peter's  days 
ceased  not  in  the  days  of  his  successors,  so  that  the  places  that  refer 
to  Peter  refer  to  his  successors,  and  it  was  provided  that  it  should 
always  be  known  where  Peter's  faith  was  to  be  sought  and  found, 
if  it  were  anywhere  lost.  How  otherwise  shall  we  stay  ourselves 
wavering  in  this  our  time?  At  this  present  there  be  thirty-four 
sects  of  opinions  in  Christendom,  all  differing  from  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  yet  all  constantly  challenging  Christ  to  be  their 
Foundation  by  Scripture,  and  all  confessing  Christ  to  be  the  Son 
of  the  living  God,  in  the  words  of  Peter's  confession.  I  think 
then  that  by  the  Stone  was  meant  Peter  and  his  successors,  to 
whom  men  may  safely  cleave,  as  it  has  been  seen  for  fifteen  hun- 
dred years  and  odd.  By  the  evangelical  voice  of  our  Saviour,  and 
by  no  councils  or  synods,  was  this  authority  of  which  we  speak 
given  to  the  Holy  See,  as  is  declared  in  the  preface  of  the  council 
Nicsea. 

"The  Greek  Church  continued  under  Rome  eight  hundred 
years,  fourteen  times  has  it  returned  to  Rome,  and  now  that  it  is 
departed  from  Rome,  it  has  fallen  into  extreme  misery.  So 
Germany,  so  Poland,  so  Denmark :  look  at  the  calamities  of  these 
countries,  in  which,  however,  no  prince  has  ever  taken  upon  him 
to  be  called  supreme  head.  They  are  departed  indeed  from  Rome, 
but  their  departure  diminishes  not  the  authority  of  Rome,  more 
than  the  loss  of  Normandy  or  France  or  Scotland  takes  away  the 
imperial  authority  of  England,  but  that  it  is  an  imperial  crown 
still.  It  is  alleged  that  it  was  by  a  provincial  council  or  assembly 
of  the  clergy  of  the  realm  of  England  that  the  authority  of  the 
pope  was  abolished,  and  some  inculcate  this  against  us  as  a  matter 
of  great  weight.  But  no  provincial  or  particular  council  can 
make  a  determination  against  the  universal  Church  of  Christ. 


The  Elizabethan  Settlement  in  the  Church       305 

And  the  learned  men  who  were  the  doers  of  that,  as  many  as  are 
dead  repented  of  their  act  before  they  died,  and  those  that  live  have 
openly  revoked  the  same.  The  doctrine  of  our  adversaries  is  not 
yet  fifty  years  old.  If  a  man  should  ask  them  of  whom  they 
learned  it,  they  would  say  of  the  Germans.  And  of  whom  learned 
it  the  Germans  ?  Of  Luther.  And  of  whom  learned  it  Luther  ? 
He  shall  answer  for  himself.  In  one  of  his  books  he  says  that 
such  things  as  he  taught  against  the  mass  and  the  blessed  sacra- 
ment of  the  altar  he  learned  of  Satan  the  devil.  At  whose  hands 
it  is  like  that  he  received  the  rest  of  his  doctrine.  Luther  ac- 
knowledges the  Devil  to  be  his  schoolmaster  in  divers  points  of 
his  doctrine." 

§  7.   Arguments  against  the  Act  for  Uniformity 

Against  the  other  great  measure,  the  Act  for  Uniformity,  which 
restored  the  English  service,  the  oration  of  Feckenham,  the  only 
abbot  in  this,  the  last  abbot  that  sat  in  any  Parliament,  repeated 
with  some  emphasis  several  arguments  that  had  not  been  unheard 
before.  King  Lucius  and  his  fabulous  embassy,  and  the  Roman 
emissaries,  Damianus  and  Faganus,  came  out  again,  and  the 
alleged  antiquity  of  the  papal  doctrine.  "Here  are  two  kinds  of 
religion  propounded,  —  the  one  fourteen  hundred  years  old,  the 
other  here  set  in  a  book  to  be  received  and  established  by  authority 
of  this  Parliament,  and  to  take  effect  next  midsummer.  Which 
of  these  is  the  more  steadfast  and  agreeable  with  itself?  Is  it 
that  which  has  a  new  book  devised  every  other  year,  every  new  book 
according  to  the  sincere  word  of  God,  and  never  a  one  of  them 
agreeing  in  all  points  with  the  other?"  He  went  on  to  point  out, 
not  with  extreme  accuracy,  the  differences  between  the  First  and 
Second  Book  of  Edward.  And  he  ended  with  a  lamentable 
description  of  the  disorders,  the  lawlessness,  the  running  before  the 
law,  which  marked  the  new  religion.  "Which  of  these  religions 
breeds  the  more  humble  and  obedient  subjects  ?  In  good  Mary's 
days  the  people  lived  in  order,  and  ran  not  before  the  law.  There 
was  no  spoiling  of  churches,  no  pulling  down  of  altars,  and  blas- 
phemous treading  of  sacraments  under  foot,  and  hanging  up  of  the 
knave  of  clubs  in  the  place  thereof.  There  was  no  scotching  and 
cutting  of  the  face  and  legs  of  the  crucifix  and  image  of  Christ; 
no  flesh  eating  and  shambles  kept  in  Lent  and  days  prohibited. 
In  Mary's  days  the  subjects,  especially  the  nobility,  knew  the  way 
to  churches  and  chapels,  there  to  begin  the  day  with  prayers; 


306  English  Historians 

but  since  the  coming  of  Elizabeth  our  dear  lady  and  queen,  all 
things  are  turned  upside  down  by  the  preachers  and  scafford- 
players  of  this  new  religion.  Obedience  is  gone,  humility  is 
abolished,  chastity  and  strict  living  denied."  But  Feckenham's 
recollections  were  perhaps  of  more  value  than  his  arguments. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Beesly,  Queen  Elizabeth,  chap.  ii.  Froude,  History  of  England,  Vol.  VIT, 
chap.  i.  Gneist,  History  of  the  English  Constitution,  chap,  xxxiii.  Makower, 
Constitutional  History  of  the  Church  of  England.  Gee  and  Hardy,  Docu- 
ments Illustrative  of  English  Church  History.  Gee,  The  Elizabethan  Clergy. 
The  Cambridge  Modern  History,  Vol.  II,  chap,  xvi,  for  the  Anglican 
Settlement. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

EUROPE  AND  ENGLAND  IN  THE  ELIZABETHAN  AGE 

No  one  can  hope  to  understand  the  domestic  politics  of  Queen 
Elizabeth's  reign  without  reference  to  the  political  and  ecclesi- 
astical events  and  movements  on  the  Continent.  The  Counter- 
Reformation,  the  untiring  and  ceaseless  activities  of  the  Jesuits 
in  England,  and  the  papal  bull  excommunicating  Elizabeth  threat- 
ened the  foundations  of  the  settlement  reached  in  the  English 
Church  and  State.  Dangers  from  uprisings  called  forth  by  the 
possibilities  of  foreign  intervention  led  to  persecutions  out  of 
harmony  with  the  original  policy  of  the  queen.  Political  plots 
helped  to  bring  Mary  Stuart  to  the  block,  and  the  conflict  with 
Philip  of  Spain  drew  English  sailors  out  into  the  high  seas,  thus 
contributing  to  the  founding  of  England's  world  trade  and 
empire.  The  most  remarkable  attempt  to  trace  the  relation  be- 
tween English  politics  and  continental  affairs  is  by  Professor  Seeley 
in  his  two  volumes  on  the  Growth  o)  English  Policy.  In  the  third 
chapter  of  his  first  volume  he  gives  a  concise  and  illuminating 
description  of  the  religious  situation  in  the  second  half  of  the  six- 
teenth century. 

§  i .   Elizabeth  and  English  Insularity 1 

Elizabeth  stood  in  a  singular  degree  disconnected  from  the  royal 
caste.  Never  have  we  seen  a  sovereign  so  completely  English. 
Not  only  was  she  English  by  birth  on  both  sides,  but  her  relatives 
were  all  English,  and  no  foreign  prince  or  princess  anywhere  existed 
who  could  count  kinship  with  her.  That  a  sovereign  so  isolated 
should  reign  over  England  for  forty-five  years  was  a  fact  of  great 

1  Seeley,  Growth  oj  British  Policy,  Vol.  I,  Part  I,  chap.  iii.  By  permission 
of  the  Cambridge  University  Press. 

307 


308  English   Historians 

importance  in  English  history.  It  concurred  with  that  other  fact, 
the  new  solidarity  of  the  English  and  Scotch  created  by  the  Refor- 
mation, to  heighten  our  insularity.  The  English  State  in  former 
times  had  not  been  properly  insular,  since  on  the  one  hand  the 
royal  house  was  French  and  had  possessions  in  France  and  foreign 
affinities,  and  on  the  other  hand  Scotland  was  foreign  and  had 
foreign  alliances.  It  was  not  insular,  since  its  frontier  was  not 
maritime  but  continental.  But  now  the  Continent  had  moved 
away  from  us  and  Scotland  had  drawn  nearer.  Elizabeth  already 
rested  on  a  party  which  was  partly  Scotch,  partly  English.  An 
insular  power  began  henceforth  to  grow  up,  and  nothing  could  be 
more  favorable  to  the  growth  of  it  than  that  it  should  be  ruled  for 
well-nigh  half  a  century  by  a  sovereign  so  absolutely  free  from 
foreign  entanglements. 

§  2.   Religion  as  a  Political  Factor — Lutheranism  and  Cal- 
vinism Contrasted 

We  are  now  to  watch  the  gradual  growth  of  a  new  danger, 
which  in  thirty  years  grew  to  such  a  point  that  we  were  exposed 
to  a  great  invasion  on  a  scale  hitherto  unparalleled,  and  found  our 
policy  drawn  permanently  into  a  different  course. 

A  new  age  is  introduced  by  two  new  movements,  by  the  Hugue- 
not movement  in  France,  and  by  the  disaffection  in  the  Low 
Countries  against  the  government  of  Philip.  Both  these  move- 
ments are  religious,  and  in  both  of  them  the  Reformation  appears 
in  resolute  opposition  not  only  to  the  Church  but  also  to  the  estab- 
lished government. 

This  was  the  most  striking  novel  feature  of  the  new  religious 
movement  now  beginning,  which  may  be  called  the  second  or 
Calvinistic  Reformation.  Hitherto  the  Reformation  had  been 
opposed  indeed  to  the  hierarchy,  but  had  been  loyal  to  the  govern- 
ment, as  on  the  other  hand  government  had  been  the  agent  of  the 
Reformation.  Luther's  inclination  to  the  side  of  the  State  had 
been  from  the  outset  very  decided,  and  had  been  avowed  by  him 
with  characteristic  energy  at  the  time  of  the  Peasant  Revolt. 
And  almost  universally  down  to  the  time  now  before  us,  the  new 
religious  system  had  been  introduced  under  the  authority  of  the 
State.  In  England  this  was  perhaps  most  manifestly  the  case, 
where  the  author  of  the  Reformation  was  the  king  himself,  and 
where  the  accession  of  a  new  sovereign  changed  the  aspect  of  the 
national  religion  three  times  successively..  But  it  was  also  the 


Europe  and  England  in  the  Elizabethan  Age     309 

case  substantially  abroad  throughout  the  Germanic  and  Scandi- 
navian world.  In  the  North  the  leader  of  reform  was  Gustav 
Wasa,  the  first  king  of  Sweden,  so  that  the  Reformation  was  a 
principal  factor  in  the  original  composition  of  the  Swedish  monar- 
chy. In  the  German  Empire  and  the  Swiss  Confederation  local 
government  was  strongly  developed  and  central  government  was 
weak.  In  Switzerland  the  Reformation  was  adopted,  where  it 
was  adopted,  by  the  councils  of  the  great  towns.  In  the  empire 
it  was  adopted  under  the  authority  of  princes,  such  as  the  electors 
of  Saxony  and  Brandenburg  and  the  Landgrave  of  Hesse,  within 
their  own  territories ;  and  at  first  actually  with  the  permission 
of  the  Diet,  though  this  permission  was  afterwards  withdrawn. 
Scarcely  anywhere  in  the  Lutheran  Reformation  had  religion  been 
made  a  ground  or  justification  of  rebellion. 

But  now  in  Scotland  a  different  precedent  was  set,  where  refor- 
mation and  rebellion  went  hand  in  hand,  where  a  disaffected  party 
openly  attacked  the  mass  as  idolatrous  and  established  a  new 
religious  system  by  open  resistance  to  authority.  And  only  in 
this  way  would  it  be  possible  for  the  Reformation  to  find  an  en- 
trance either  into  France  or  into  any  part  of  the  dominion  of  Philip. 
For  in  both  those  regions  the  central  government  was  strong  and 
Catholic.  There  were  here  no  principalities,  bishoprics,  or  munici- 
palities so  independent  as  to  be  practically  sovereign,  and  linked 
together  only  by  a  federal  diet  whose  decrees  could  easily  be  re- 
sisted. And  yet  at  this  time  the  Reformation  as  an  influence  was 
in  some  respects  more  irresistible  than  ever.  Calvin,  who  from 
Geneva  still  directed  the  whirlwind,  had  given  it  a  systematized 
doctrine,  and  it  had  by  this  time  the  prestige  of  many  triumphs. 
Accordingly,  the  Reformation  begins  once  more  to  be  powerfully 
aggressive,  and  its  aggressions  now  necessarily  take  the  character 
of  rebellions  against  the  State. 

This  is  the  innovation  which  gives  its  character  to  the  new  age. 
It  transferred  controversy  into  another  region.  The  last  genera- 
tion had  arraigned  the  Church,  accusing  it  of  a  departure  from 
primitive  Christianity ;  this  generation  called  in  question  the  author- 
ity of  the  State,  inquiring  whether  rebellion  might  not  in  certain  cir- 
cumstances be  lawful.  The  question  was  at  first  raised  in  behalf 
of  the  Reformation,  but  it  may  be  doubted  whether  the  Reforma- 
tion profited  by  it  and  whether  it  ought  not  to  be  reckoned  among 
the  principal  causes  of  the  Counter-Reformation.  For  it  was  a 
weapon  which  could  easily  be  turned  against  the  Reformation. 
If  Calvin's  followers  might  claim,  in  certain  circumstam  es,  the 


310  English   Historians 

right  to  rebel  against  a  Catholic  sovereign,  might  not  a  fortiori  a. 
Catholic  people  rebel  against  a  Protestant,  a  heretical  sovereign? 
It  was  an  ancient  pretension  of  the  papacy,  a  pretension  which  had 
often  been  allowed,  to  dictate  to  kings  and  in  case  of  contumacy  to 
punish  or  depose  them,  and  such  a  claim  was  not  only  less  novel, 
but  might  seem  less  presumptuous,  when  urged  in  the  name  of  the 
Catholic  Church  than  when  advanced  by  a  modern  sect.  Now  in 
the  Lutheran  period,  when  the  Reformation  and  government 
went  together,  several  monarchies  had  attached  themselves  to  the 
Reformation.  Such  monarchies  then  were  henceforth  exposed 
to  the  rebellion  of  their  Catholic  subjects. 

§  3.    The  Religious  Situation  on  the  Continent 

The  age  upon  which  we  now  enter  is  one  of  the  most  intense  and 
terrible  that  Europe  has  ever  experienced.  It  may  be  said  to  be 
the  last  of  the  theocratic  ages,  for  it  is  an  age  in  which  ecclesias- 
tical influences  take  the  lead  as  they  had  done  in  the  days  of 
Innocent  or  Hildebrand  and  as  they  have  never  done  since  the 
close  of  the  sixteenth  century,  not  even,  as  we  shall  find,  in  the 
Thirty  Years'  War.  But  the  superiority  is  most  signally  on  the 
Catholic  side.  The  tendency,  the  irresistible  drift,  of  the  time 
is  toward  the  Counter-Reformation,  not  toward  the  Reformation. 
It  is  the  more  necessary  for  us  to  recognize  this  because  at  this 
very  time  England  asserted  her  insular  character  in  the  most 
emphatic  manner  by  deciding  irrevocably  in  favor  of  the  Refor- 
mation. Let  us  look,  then,  at  the  broad  result  of  the  struggle. 

At  the  very  beginning  of  the  period  all  germs  favorable  to  the 
Reformation  were  utterly  extinguished  in  Spain  and  Italy. 

In  France,  the  principal  arena  of  the  contest  and  where  at  the 
outset  the  Huguenot  party  showed  all  the  eager  zeal  which  we  are 
apt  to  consider  a  sure  sign  of  victory,  the  Catholic  cause  neverthe- 
less came  out  signally  and  decisively  victorious.  All  that  zeal 
could  not  save  the  Huguenots  from  being  deserted  by  their  heroic 
leader,  and  the  toleration  they  ultimately  secured  was  but  the 
commencement  of  a  long  decline,  but  a  halfway  house  between  the 
St.  Bartholomew  and  the  dragonnades. 

In  the  Low  Countries  ten  out  of  seventeen  provinces  were  won 
back  to  Catholicism,  and  have  remained  faithful  to  it  ever  since. 

Poland  and,  somewhat  later,  Bohemia,  were  won  back  to 
Catholicism. 

In  Germany,  the  home  of  the  Reformation,  which  Charles  V 


Europe  and  England  in  the  Elizabethan  Age     311 

had  probably  regarded  as  irretrievably  given  over  to  the  Reforma- 
tion, an  immense  reaction  took  place,  so  that  the  whole  southern 
part  of  the  country  was  recovered  to  Catholicism. 

For  all  these  losses  the  Reformation  had  on  the  Continent  only 
one  compensation,  —  the  seven  provinces  of  the  United  Nether- 
lands. These  were  successfully  torn  from  the  very  hands  of  Philip. 
No  very  considerable  acquisition  territorially  !  But  in  the  seven- 
teenth century  this  reformed  community  showed  an  astonishing 
vigor  and  attained  a  prodigious  prosperity. 

This  on  the  Continent  was  the  only  new  acquisition.  But  the 
Reformation  retained  what  it  had  acquired  in  the  days  of  Luther, 
—  the  Scandinavian  kingdoms,  three  great  electorates,  and  the 
richest  of  the  Swiss  cantons. 

§  4.    England  and  the  Continental  Situation 

It  is  a  surprising  proof  of  the  insularity  which  was  beginning  to 
characterize  us  that  we  remained  undisturbed  by  this  irresistible 
drift,  and  settled  down,  both  England  and  Scotland,  to  the  Refor- 
mation in  this  very  period.  Probably  nothing  short  of  this  could 
have  saved  the  cause  of  the  Reformation  in  the  world. 

As  we  were  so  little  influenced  by  the  movement  of  the  Counter- 
Reformation,  the  question  arises  how  we  became  involved  in  the 
wars  that  accompanied  it.  We  enjoyed  for  a  time  the  security  that 
resulted  from  the  fact  that  Philip  had  his  hands  full  in  the  Low 
Countries  and  that  the  French  government  was  occupied  with  the 
Huguenots,  while  neither  of  those  powers  wished  the  other  to  ac- 
quire influence  over  England.  How  happened  it  that  after  a  time 
this  security  was  lost,  and  that  in  the  end  we  drifted  into  a  great 
war  with  Spain  ? 

That  first  phase  of  Elizabethan  policy  which  we  have  sketched 
is  merely  the  necessary  effort  by  which  at  the  outset  she  secured 
her  throne.  Her  reign  itself  now  begins,  and  we  may  already 
make  a  general  reflection  on  the  character  which  English  policy 
must  necessarily  have  had  in  the  Elizabethan  age.  The  position 
of  our  State  among  states  and  the  dangers  to  which  it  was  exposed 
were  wholly  unlike  those  to  which  we  have  since  been  accustomed. 
Policy  could  not  then  be  determined  by  considerations  of  trade 
or  colonial  empire,  as  in  the  eighteenth  century;  nor  had  we  yet 
begun  to  look  wistfully  towards  the  Low  Countries  or  to  apprehend 
the  encroachments  of  France.  We  had,  indeed,  our  keen  anxieties, 
but  they  were  of  another  kind,  —  of  a  kind  which  passed  away  with 


3 12  English   Historians 

the  Elizabethan  age.  In  foreign  as  in  domestic  policy,  everything 
turned  on  the  questions  of  succession  and  of  religion,  and  these  two 
questions  were  intimately  connected. 

Would  it  be  possible  for  Elizabeth,  a  heretic  and  the  daughter 
of  Anne  Boleyn,  to  support  herself  long  upon  the  throne  ?  Was 
she  not  likely,  like  her  brother  and  sister,  to  die  early,  and  if  so, 
who  would  succeed  her?  Could  a  heretic  be  permitted  a  second 
time  to  mount  a  throne  ?  Reformation  was  giving  place  to  Counter- 
Reformation,  and  this  was  about  to  strike  a  great  blow  for  universal 
dominion.  The  visible  claimant  to  the  succession,  Mary  of  Scot- 
land, adhered  to  it.  It  appeared,  therefore,  as  if  the  country  were 
approaching  a  new  revolution,  which  would  arrive  either  with 
the  death  of  Elizabeth  or  with  her  fall  through  some  attack  made 
upon  her  by  the  powers  of  the  Counter-Reformation. 

The  great  problem  of  policy  then  was  how  to  avert  such  a 
catastrophe.  In  general  there  seemed  but  one  way  of  doing  this, 
a  way  characteristic  of  the  Habsburg  age.  New  heirs  must  be 
provided,  that  is,  marriages  must  be  made.  Elizabeth  must  take 
a  husband,  Mary  Stuart  must  take  a  husband.  In  this  way  events 
might  be  brought  about  within  Britain  similar  to  those  which  had 
already  transformed  the  Continent.  England  and  Scotland  might 
be  united  as  Castile  and  Aragon  had  been;  at  the  same  time  it 
would  be  decided  whether  this  insular  state  should  belong  to  the 
Reformation  or  to  the  Counter-Reformation.  Such  is  the  problem 
of  the  Elizabethan  age  stated  in  its  most  general  form.  When 
now  we  survey  the  age  itself  as  a  whole,  it  is  seen  to  consist,  first, 
of  a  long  period  of  drifting  into  war  with  Spain ;  secondly,  of  the 
war  itself,  which  did  not  actually  come  to  an  end,  though  it  was 
practically  decided,  before  Elizabeth's  death.  On  the  threshold 
then  we  meet  the  question,  What  caused  the  drift  toward  war,  since 
Elizabeth  could  in  no  case  desire  war  with  the  greatest  power  in  the 
world,  nor  could  Philip  desire  war  with  England  for  its  own  sake, 
being  already  overburdened?  And  the  answer  which  presents 
itself  is  this,  That  the  religious  crisis  was  just  then  so  intense  as  to 
take  the  initiative  out  of  the  hands  of  governments  and  to  hurry 
them  against  their  will  into  war.  In  short,  the  solution  lies  in  the 
word  Counter -Re}  or  motion.  But  what  precisely  does  this  word 
convey?  That  it  does  not  mean  merely  that  inevitable  reaction 
which  follows  a  great  movement  of  opinion,  not  merely  a  certain 
disappointment  in  the  results  of  the  great  undertaking  of  Luther, 
or  a  certain  fatigue  and  sense  of  failure,  follows  from  what  has 
just  been  said.  As  we  have  seen,  the  religious  parties,  Catholic 


Europe  and   England  in  the   Elizabethan  Age     313 

and  Protestant  alike,  had  begun  to  defy  the  civil  government. 
This  innovation  could  not  but  give  an  immense  advantage  to 
Catholicism,  not  only  because  it  exposed  the  Reformation  govern- 
ments, which  were  mostly  somewhat  imperfectly  established,  to  the 
rebellion  of  the  Catholic  subjects,  but  also  because  it  provoked 
to  deadly  hostility  against  the  Reformation  the  Catholic  govern- 
ments, among  which  were  the  greatest  in  the  world.  And  thus 
we  see  that  Philip  never  for  a  moment  negotiates  or  offers  to 
bargain  with  heresy,  as  Charles  V  had  repeatedly  done. 

But  we  also  perceive  that  the  Catholic  party  must  have  acquired 
in  the  sixties  of  the  century  some  new  resource  of  immense  im- 
portance, so  suddenly  and  overwhelmingly  does  the  tide  turn  in 
their  favor.  About  1560  Catholicism  seems  to  be  falling  into  its 
final  dissolution,  England  and  Scotland  having  been  lost,  and 
France  seeming  likely  to  follow  them,  while  Philip  has  but  re- 
cently waged  open  war  with  the  papacy.  Twenty  years  later  all 
is  changed,  and  throughout  the  Continent  the  impression  prevails 
that  the  struggle  is  well-nigh  over  and  that  the  Reformation  is 
defeated.  And  the  change  was  lasting.  Never  since  has  the 
Reformation  recovered  the  ground  it  lost  so  unexpectedly  in  those 
years.  Such  is  the  Counter-Reformation,  one  of  the  greatest  events 
in  the  history  of  Europe,  and  as  a  matter  of  historical  curiosity 
more  interesting  because  more  difficult  to  understand  than  the 
Reformation  itself. 

§  5.  Reform  at  Rome 

For  this  very  reason,  however,  we  must  resist  the  temptation 
of  discussing  it  further  than  as  it  concerns  English  policy.  We 
have  to  inquire  not  into  its  remote  causes  or  successive  phases,  but 
merely  into  the  cause  which  at  this  particular  moment  imparted  to 
it  such  an  overwhelmingly  practical  force.  The  Counter-Refor- 
mation first  enters  into  history  properly  so  called  with  the  election 
of  Caraffa  to  the  papal  chair  in  1555.  This  was  indeed  a  startling 
event.  It  removed  that  grievance  which  for  something  like  two 
centuries  had  driven  pious  minds  almost  to  madness,  the  griev- 
ance that  the  Vicar  of  Christ  was  not  Christian  at  all,  but  either 
heathen  or  something  worse.  At  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth 
century  the  Vicar  of  Christ  had  been  convicted  of  piracy  and 
sodomy,  and  at  the  end  of  it  he  had  been  a  notorious  poisoner  and 
murderer.  Except  one  or  two  urbane  humanists  such  as  Nicholas 
V  or  Pius  II,  scarcely  any  pope  since  the  fourteenth  century  could 


314  English   Historians 

seriously  pretend  to  the  Christian  character,  though  several  had 
shown  remarkable  heathen  qualities.  With  Paul  IV  the  papacy 
became  religious  again,  and  on  the  whole  it  has  retained  that 
character  ever  since. 

But  it  seemed  for  a  while  that  this  purgation  of  the  papacy  was 
likely  rather  to  destroy  it  at  once  than  to  rejuvenate  it.  Paul  IV 
stands  with  Clement  VII  as  the  most  unfortunate  of  the  popes. 
The  devout  fanatic  inflicted  on  Catholicism  a  wound  almost  more 
serious  than  that  which  was  inflicted  by  the  hardened  worldling. 
His  headstrong  zeal  threw  away  England  and  Scotland,  alienated 
France,  and  broke  with  Philip.  Under  his  successor,  Pius  IV, 
new  measures  were  adopted  expressly  on  account  of  the  desperate 
extremity  to  which  the  Church  was  reduced. 

It  was  soon,  however,  shown  that  the  ill  fortune  of  Paul  IV 
had  not  been  caused  by  the  daring  courage  with  which  he  had 
asserted  the  religious  character  of  the  papacy  and  its  independence 
of  secular  interests,  but  by  an  eccentricity  quite  peculiar  to  himself. 
Caraffa  was  not  simply  a  devoted  Catholic,  but  also  an  enraged 
Neapolitan  politician,  a  leader  of  opposition  to  the  Habsburg 
interest.  His  mortal  enemy  along  with  the  Reformation  was 
Philip  of  Spain,  and  he  had  two  ends  in  view  at  the  same  time,— 
the  one  to  crush  heresy,  the  other  to  drive  the  Spaniards  out  of 
Italy.  Now  if  anything  was  certain  it  was  this,  that  in  that  age 
Spain  and  Catholicism  must  advance  or  retreat  together;  that  the 
Spanish  power  was  the  only  weapon  with  which  the  Church  could 
fight  the  Reformation,  and  that  Philip  was  the  true  nursing-father 
to  whom  the  Church  must  look,  and  truly  though  not  nominally 
the  Christian  emperor  of  the  time.  To  measure  forces  was  not  the 
talent  of  the  fanatical  Neapolitan,  and  he  had  no  conception  that 
his  hatred  for  Philip  undid  whatever  his  devotion  to  Catholicism 
was  able  to  achieve.  He  stands  out  in  history  as  the  man  who 
severed  forever  the  tie  between  Britain  and  the  Roman  Church, 
and  he  did  this,  it  would  appear,  not  simply  by  want  of  tact  or 
patience  in  dealing  with  Elizabeth,  but  from  his  animosity  against 
Philip,  which  led  him  to  regard  the  whole  Marian  movement  with 
disfavor  because  the  Habsburg  interest  was  promoted  by  it.  ... 

§  6.   Council  of  Trent  and  Elements  of  the  Catholic  Reformation 

It  was  Pius  IV  who  reassembled  the  Council  of  Trent,  and 
now  at  last  brought  its  sittings  to  a  satisfactory  conclusion.  In 
the  year  1564  this  was  accomplished.  And  this  is  the  great 


Europe  and  England  in  the  Elizabethan  Age     315 

occurrence  which  launched  the  Counter-Reformation  upon  its 
triumphant  career. 

That  the  council,  which  had  failed  under  Paul  III  and  again 
under  Julius  III,  did  not  fail  a  third  time,  was  due  in  the  first  place 
to  the  fact  that  Charles  V  was  gone.  So  long  as  there  was  an  om- 
nipotent emperor,  the  discord  of  pope  and  emperor  was  as  incur- 
able as  in  the  days  of  the  Hohenstauffen.  But  Ferdinand  with 
his  modest  pretensions  and  character  excited  no  similar  jealousy. 
Moreover,  the  Peace  of  Cateau-Cambresis  had  not  only  termi- 
nated the  wars  which  had  disturbed  the  council  in  its  earlier  periods, 
but  had  actually  united  the  Habsburg  and  the  Valois  by  a  mar- 
riage tie.  Further,  the  papacy  saw  no  hope  but  in  a  successful 
termination  of  the  council,  and  was  content  with  such  a  termi- 
nation as  would  give  unity  and  a  fixed  programme  to  the  Catholic 
Church  as  it  stood,  renouncing  the  hope  of  suppressing  heresy 
in  those  countries  where  it  was  established.  That  the  papacy  now 
at  last  wished  the  council  to  succeed,  was  the  greatest  cause  of  its 
success.  Still  the  obstacles  for  a  time  seemed  insurmountable. 
For  the  Papal  See  had  all  along  held  and  continued  to  hold  the 
council  firmly  in  its  grasp  through  its  legates,  who  retained  the 
right  of  initiative,  and  through  the  superior  number  of  Italian 
bishops.  But  how  could  the  papacy  in  its  weakened  state  succeed 
in  overcoming  the  opposition  of  the  bishops  who  claimed  an  in- 
dependent authority,  especially  as  a  third  failure  seemed  likely  to 
have  fatal  consequences  ? 

It  appealed  from  the  bishops  to  the  sovereigns.  Neither  the 
Habsburgs  nor  the  Valois,  any  more  than  the  pope,  desired  to  see 
their  own  bishops  invested  with  an  independent  spiritual  power. 
Philip,  in  particular,  was  well  aware  that  his  internal  authority 
depended  mainly  upon  the  control  he  exercised  upon  the  Church  by 
patronage  and  through  the  Inquisition.  Accordingly  by  informal 
concordats,  as  it  were,  negotiated  by  Cardinal  Morone  with  Fer- 
dinand, Philip,  and  the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine  (Guise)  for  Charles 
IX,  a  settlement  was  reached,  and  what  we  may  call  modern 
Catholicism  was  called  into  existence. 

Up  to  this  time  the  Counter-Reformation  had  consisted  of  the 
following  elements:  (i)  The  new  form  of  religion  represented 
by  Caraffa.  This  was  a  spirit  of  relentless  orthodoxy,  which  was 
indigenous  in  Spain,  but  through  Caraffa  and  Michel  Ghislieri 
had  spread  to  Italy,  and  had  now  taken  possession  of  the  Papal 
See  itself.  Its  main  instrument  was  the  Inquisition,  and  it  had 
created  a  religious  Reign  of  Terror  in  Spain  and  Italy  such  as 


316  English  Historians 

Mary  Tudor  had  introduced  in  England.  (2)  The  influence 
of  the  Order  of  Jesuits,  which  just  at  this  time  began  to  be  widely 
diffused  —  Loyola  died  in  1558  —  and  which,  we  are  to  observe, 
had  also  its  origin  in  Spain.  (3)  Local  movements  in  favor  of 
Catholicism,  especially  in  Spain  and  France.  The  unquestioning 
crusading  orthodoxy  of  Spain  was  the  greatest  of  all  the  forces 
which  made  up  the  Counter-Reformation ;  but  it  was  beginning  to 
appear  that  the  French  mind  also  was  radically  adverse  to  the 
Reformation.  The  principal  cause  of  this  seems  to  lie  in  the  in- 
fluence of  the  University  of  Paris,  the  original  home  of  the  scho- 
lastic theology.  (4)  As  a  consequence  of  this,  the  authority  of 
the-two  greatest  governments  in  the  world,  that  of  Philip  and  that 
of  the  French  king,  the  latter  being  seconded  by  the  influence  of 
the  Guise  family  to  which  Mary  Stuart  belonged. 

These  influences  made  up  a  formidable  aggregate  when  once 
the  disturbance  created  by  the  eccentricity  of  Caraffa  was  removed. 
But  they  became  formidable  indeed,  nay,  almost  overwhelming 
when  they  were  all,  as  it  were,  bound  together,  and  when  the  prin- 
ciples involved  in  them  were  codified  by  the  Council  of  Trent  in 
1564. 

It  was  easy  for  the  Reformers  to  make  out  a  case  against  the 
council,  and  to  urge  that  when  the  papal  authority  itself  was  the 
question  to  be  tried  by  the  council,  it  was  an  absurdity  that  the 
conduct  of  the  council  should  be  put  in  the  hands  of  the  pope. 
But  such  reasonings  could  not  prevent  the  decisions  of  the  council 
when  they  had  once  been  arrived  at,  when  they  had  become  a  mat- 
ter of  history,  from  exercising  a  prodigious  and  durable  influence. 
All  the  world  remembered  that  twelve  hundred  years  before,  when 
the  Arian  heresy  had  threatened  the  Church,  a  council  had  been 
held,  and  that  its  decisions,  though  long  contested,  had  prevailed 
at  last  and  still  formed  the  foundation  of  Christian  orthodoxy.  It 
was  natural  to  think  that  Luther  would  share  the  fate  of  Arms, 
and  that  the  Spaniard  Philip  would  now  establish  orthodoxy  as 
the  Spaniard  Theodosius  had  done  then.  And  together  with  the 
memory  of  the  Council  of  Nicaea  the  memory  of  the  great  councils 
of  the  fifteenth  century  could  not  but  exert  its  influence.  The 
word  reformation  was  not  invented  in  Luther's  time;  a  century 
before  "Reformation  in  head  and  members"  had  been  the  watch- 
word of  a  great  ecclesiastical  party.  And  at  that  time  the  principle 
had  been  laid  down  that  the  final  appeal  lay  to  a  general  council. 
A  general  council,  it  was  said,  was  superior  to  the  pope.  And  this 
principle  had  so  far  prevailed  that  Pope  John  XXIII  had  actually 


Europe  and  England  in  the  Elizabethan  Age     317 

been  deposed  by  the  Council  of  Constance.  The  movement  had 
indeed  proved  in  the  end  abortive,  but  it  had  left  behind  it  a  fixed 
opinion  that  the  legal  method  of  reformation  in  the  Church  was 
by  a  general  council.  It  might,  indeed,  be  questioned  whether  in- 
fallibility resided  in  the  pope;  but,  if  even  a  general  council  could 
err,  what  prospect  remained  for  the  unity  of  the  Church  ?  And 
so  there  were  many  to  whom  Luther  first  appeared  as  revolution- 
ary when  he  was  heard  to  say  at  Leipzig  that  general  councils 
have  erred. 

§  7.   Altered  Character  0}  Catholicism  after  1564 

Might  it  not  then  reasonably  be  held  when  in  1564  the  Council 
of  Trent  separated,  its  work  being  done,  that  the  religious  question 
was  now  at  last  settled,  that  the  Reformation  in  head  and  members 
for  which  two  centuries  had  prayed  was  now  at  last  complete? 
The  papacy  was  once  more  religious,  the  taint  of  heathenism  and 
secularity  was  really  in  a  great  degree  purged  away,  and  the 
council  had  really  decreed  some  useful  reforms.  What  more  could 
be  desired?  What  excuse  for  heresy  still  remained?  Might  it 
not  be  fairly  conjectured  that  Luther  himself,  who  had  been  driven 
into  a  revolutionary  course  by  the  monstrous  wickedness  of  Medi- 
cean  Rome  and  the  impudence  of  Tetzel,  would  never  have 
raised  a  protest  if  he  had  seen  Rome  under  the  pious  influence  of 
Carlo  Borromeo  ? 

In  short,  the  Counter-Reformation  was  itself  undeniably  a  great 
and  real  reformation,  and  this  fact  materially  altered  the  position 
of  those  states  which  had  followed  Luther  or  Calvin.  The  Medi- 
cean  or  Farnesian  papacy  was  so  notoriously  heathenized  that 
the  cry,  "Come  out  of  her,"  might  fairly  be  raised  by  earnest 
Christian  teachers,  as  indeed  the  appalling  sack  of  Rome  under 
Clement  VII  had  been  felt  throughout  Italy  as  a  just  judgment 
of  the  Most  High.  But  that  judgment  had  done  its  work.  Gradu- 
ally but  completely  the  papacy  had  become  once  more  a  religious 
institution.  And  under  its  control  a  general  council  had  decreed 
a  reform  of  the  whole  ecclesiastical  system  which  was  undeniably 
serious  and  considerable.  On  what  ground,  then,  could  Lutherans 
and  Calvinists  still  justify  their  secession?  On  the  ground  that 
they  disapproved  the  decisions,  dogmatic  or  other,  arrived  at  by 
the  council?  This  was  at  least  a  new  ground,  different  from  that 
which  Luther  had  taken  at  the  outset.  Was  it  not  a  ground  which 
might  have  been  taken  by  any  of  the  heretical  sects  of  the  times 
between  Constantine  and  Heraclius  ? 


318  English  Historians 

What  they  might  and  did  answer  to  arguments  like  these,  of 
course  we  know.  But  we  may  admit  that  Catholicism  had  now 
assumed  a  position  in  which,  if  it  chose  to  call  itself  exclusively  the 
Christian  Church,  it  would  have  all  tradition  on  its  side.  The 
malcontents  had  appealed  to  a  general  council;  a  general  council 
had  now  spoken.  Reformation  had  been  clamorously  demanded; 
reformation  had  been  granted.  Objections  might  perhaps  be 
urged  to  the  procedure  of  the  council;  but,  on  the  whole,  which 
party  had  followed  precedent  more  faithfully,  that  which  reformed 
the  Church  altogether  by  means  of  a  council,  or  that  which  re- 
formed it  piece  by  piece  through  the  agency  of  a  town  council 
excited  by  the  eloquence  of  a  preacher? 

Catholicism  then  became  after  1 564  the  conservatism  of  Christen- 
dom, and  we  use  conservatism  here  in  its  better  sense.  It  was 
neither  the  conservatism  of  indifference  nor  that  of  dulness 
and  sloth,  but  a  conservatism  such  as  pious  and  modest  minds 
might  embrace  and  a  conservatism  favorable  to  practical  reform. 
Such  it  was  on  the  Continent;  but  we  in  Britain,  as  I  have  said, 
were  unaffected  by  the  movement  which  called  it  into  existence. 

It  rested  in  the  first  place  upon  this  broad  basis  of  conservative 
feeling.  In  the  second  place,  it  rested  upon  a  most  powerful  coali- 
tion between  the  great  sovereigns  and  the  papacy.  That  Guelf- 
Ghibelline  discord  which  had  paralyzed  the  Church  in  the  time  of 
Charles  V  had  disappeared.  Philip,  Ferdinand,  and  Charles  IX 
were  now  substantially  at  one,  and  united  with  the  pope  in  favor 
of  the  dogmatic  part  of  the  work  of  the  council.  Pius  IV  had 
deliberately  invoked  and  purchased  the  aid  of  these  secular  princes. 

But  we  are  now  further  to  note  that  the  spiritual  power  had  by 
no  means  made  itself  purely  subservient  to  the  temporal.  It  is 
the  peculiar  feature  of  this  age  that  within  the  Catholic  party  the 
religious  influence  is  once  more  supreme.  The  new-born  reli- 
gious zeal  of  the  papacy  did  not  soon  pass  away.  Caraffa  was  the 
first  of  a  long  line  of  popes  who  all  alike  were  either  themselves 
inspired  by  it  or  found  themselves  hurried  along  by  the  current. 
The  model  pope  of  this  school  is  the  Ghislieri,  Pius  V,  who  died  in 
1572.  His  zeal  was  purely  religious,  nor  could  any  man  hold  him- 
self more  superior  to  those  worldly  considerations  or  those  intrigues 
which  had  made  the  whole  policy  of  the  Medicean  papacy. 

The  result  is  that  after  1564  international  politics  begin  to  be 
controlled  by  a  new  influence.  Hitherto  we  have  seen  them  deter- 
mined by  the  family  interests  of  the  great  European  houses,  the 
Habsburg  and  the  Valois.  But  now  for  a  time  the  religious  influ- 


Europe  and  England  in  the  Elizabethan  Age     319 

ence  is  supreme.  The  regenerated  Catholic  Church  is  for  a  while 
the  mistress  of  the  world,  as  in  the  time  of  the  Crusades.  It  is  felt 
that  the  Council  of  Trent  ought  to  be  followed  by  the  suppression  of 
heresy  everywhere,  as  of  a  thing  no  longer  excusable. 

What  has  been  called  here  the  reconversion  to  Christianity  of 
the  Papal  See  is  one  of  the  most  remarkable  passages  in  the  whole 
history  of  the  Church.  It  has  been,  however,  obscured  from  the 
view  of  Protestants  by  the  fact  that  the  Christianity  of  a  Caraffa 
or  a  Ghislieri  seems  to  them  no  Christianity.  Assuredly  it  was 
not  the  evangelical  religion  that  we  find  in  the  New  Testament. 
It  had  little  of  "sweet  reasonableness"  or  of  "sweetness  and  light." 
It  was  in  one  word  not  the  Christianity  of  Jesus  but  the  Christi- 
anity of  Hildebrand  and  Innocent.  It  was  a  religion  of  Crusades 
and  of  the  Inquisition.  Its  principal  achievements  were  the  St. 
Bartholomew  and  the  autos  da  je  of  Philip  II,  and  it  may  no  doubt 
be  argued  with  much  plausibility  that  a  Medicean  surrounded  by 
artists  and  humanists  did  more  real  good  at  the  Vatican  than  a 
Ghislieri  among  his  inquisitors.  Indeed,  the  decline  of  Italian 
genius  both  in  art  and  literature  went  hand  in  hand  with  this 
revival  of  religion.  But  though  it  may  have  been  a  dark  type 
of  religion,  yet  the  new  spirit  which  began  at  this  time  to  animate 
the  papacy  has  all  the  characteristics  of  religion,  as  the  old  spirit 
with  all  its  amiability  and  urbanity  was  consciously  and  frankly 
irreligious.  A  Luther  would  not  have  regarded  Pius  V  with  the 
feeling  of  horror  with  which  Leo  X  affected  him.  Luther,  full  of 
religious  feeling,  seemed  to  see  in  Leo  Antichrist  in  person,  and 
none  the  less  because  of  the  pictures  and  the  poems.  But  per- 
haps there  never  lived  a  man  who  conveyed  a  more  pure  impres- 
sion of  religiousness  than  Pius  V.  He  who  brought  Carnesecchi 
to  the  stake,  who  charged  his  soldiers,  when  they  parted  for  France, 
to  give  no  quarter  to  Huguenots,  he  of  whom  no  one  doubted  that 
had  he  lived  four  months  longer  so  as  to  see  the  St.  Bartholomew, 
he  would  have  yielded  up  his  breath  with  a  most  exultant  Nunc 
dimittis,  was  nevertheless  a  saint,  if  devotion,  single-mindedness, 
unworldly  sincerity,  can  make  a  saint. 

It  has  often  been  remarked  that  Christianity  has  taken  several 
great  typical  forms.  We  see  in  Cyprian  and  Augustine  the  grad- 
ual growth  of  a  Latin  Christianity,  the  characteristics  of  which 
Milman  has  so  luminously  discriminated.  Luther  may  be  said 
to  have  created  Teutonic  Christianity.  The  new  development  we 
have  now  before  us  resembles  these  in  being  the  result  of  a  blend- 
ing of  Christianity  with  the  spirit  of  a  particular  nation.  It  is 


320  English  Historians 

Spanish  Christianity.  Its  precursors  in  past  time  had  been 
Dominic  in  the  distant  thirteenth  century,  and  more  recently 
Queen  Isabella,  whose  image  may  be  traced  among  ourselves  in 
her  granddaughter,  Mary  Tudor.  Caraffa  himself  had  passed 
many  years  in  Spain.  Philip  and  Alva,  both  Spaniards,  were  the 
statesmen  of  the  movement.  The  Spaniard  Ignatius  Loyola  was 
its  apostle.  In  Spain  alone  it  seems  a  natural  growth,  and  thus, 
while  in  Italy  we  find  it  fatal  to  genius,  it  exerts  a  less  withering 
influence  there,  and  in  its  great  literary  representative,  Calderon, 
can  boast  of  one  of  the  great  poets  of  the  world.  The  circum- 
stances of  Spanish  history  explain  the  peculiarity  of  it.  Its  mer- 
ciless rigor  toward  heterodoxy  is  not  only  in  accordance  with  the 
Spanish  character,  but  it  was  the  natural  result  of  a  historic  devel- 
opment which  had  been  wholly  determined  by  wars  of  religion. 

These  general  remarks  prepare  us  to  regard  the  year  1564  as 
introducing  a  new  age.  A  final  attempt  was  now  to  be  made  to  re- 
store the  unity  of  Christendom  in  accordance  with  the  decrees 
of  the  Council  of  Trent  by  putting  down  the  heretical  sects  which 
in  nearly  half  a  century  since  the  first  appearance  of  Luther  had 
been  allowed  to  acquire  such  influence.  Thus  a  great  trial  is 
preparing  for  England. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Cheney,  International  Law  under  Elizabeth,  in  the  English  Historical 
Review,  October,  1905.  Ranke,  History  of  England,  Vol.  I,  pp.  280  ff.,  on 
the  European  situation.  Froude,  Lectures  on  the  Council  of  Trent.  Beesly, 
Queen  Elizabeth,  chaps,  iii,  vi,  vii,  and  x.  Blok,  History  of  the  People  of 
the  Netherlands,  Vol.  III.  Cambridge  Modern  History,  Vol.  II.  Robinson, 
Readings  in  European  History,  Vol.  II,  chap,  xxviii. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE   GROWTH   OF   PURITANISM 

THE  religious  beliefs  which  were  to  complicate  the  political  and 
constitutional  questions  of  the  seventeenth  century  had  gained 
strong  hold  in  England  before  the  death  of  Queen  Elizabeth. 
The  revolt  against  the  old  Church  had  given  authority  a  severe 
blow ;  the  multiplication  of  books  through  printing  had  helped 
to  break  up  the  uniformity  of  ignorance  and  indifference  which 
characterized  the  lower  classes  in  the  Middle  Ages.  Weighty 
theological  questions  which  had  been  reserved  to  the  learned  in 
earlier  days  became  matters  of  common  controversies.  The  fer- 
ment of  intellectual  activity  began  to  work  among  the  people,  and 
quite  naturally  theology  was  the  subject-matter  of  that  newly 
awakened  interest.  Thus  it  was  that  Puritanism,  with  its  emphasis 
on  moral  discipline  and  individual  conscience,  sprang  into  existence, 
and  contributed  greatly  to  that  independence  among  the  people 
which  resisted  political  as  well  as  religious  authority.  On  this 
topic,  John  Richard  Green  wrote  with  great  sympathy  and  insight. 

§  i.   Position  0}  the  Bible  in  Elizabethan  Literature1 

No  greater  moral  change  ever  passed  over  a  nation  than  passed 
over  England  during  the  years  which  parted  the  middle  of  the 
reign  of  Elizabeth  from  the  meeting  of  the  Long  Parliament. 
England  became  the  people  of  a  book,  and  that  book  was  the 
Bible.  It  was  as  yet  the  one  English  book  which  was  familiar  to 
every  Englishman ;  it  was  read  at  churches  and  read  at  home,  and 
everywhere  its  words,  as  they  fell  on  ears  which  custom  had  not 
deadened,  kindled  a  startling  enthusiasm.  When  Bishop  Bonner 

1  Green,  Short  History  of  the  English  People,  pp.  460  ff.  By  permission 
of  Mrs.  John  Richard  Green. 

Y  321 


322  English  Historians 

set  up  the  first  six  Bibles  in  St.  Paul's,  "many  well-disposed  people 
used  much  to  resort  to  the  hearing  thereof,  especially  when  they 
could  get  any  that  had  an  audible  voice  to  read  to  them.".  .  . 
"One  John  Porter  used  sometimes  to  be  occupied  in  that  goodly 
exercise,  to  the  edifying  of  himself  as  well  as  others.  This  Porter 
was  a  fresh  young  man  and  of  a  big  stature,  and  great  multitudes 
would  resort  thither  to  hear  him,  because  he  could  read  well  and 
had  an  audible  voice."  But  the  "goodly  exercise"  of  readers 
such  as  Porter  was  soon  superseded  by  the  continued  recitation 
of  both  Old  Testament  and  New  in  the  public  services  of  the 
Church ;  while  the  small  Geneva  Bibles  carried  the  Scripture  into 
every  home.  The  popularity  of  the  Bible  was  owing  to  other 
causes  besides  that  of  religion.  The  whole  prose  literature  of 
England,  save  the  forgotten  tracts  of  Wycliffe,  has  grown  up  since 
the  translation  of  the  Scriptures  by  Tyndale  and  Coverdale. 

So  far  as  the  nation  at  large  was  concerned,  no  history,  no 
romance,  hardly  any  poetry,  save  the  little-known  verse  of  Chaucer, 
existed  in  the  English  tongue  when  the  Bible  was  ordered  to  be 
set  up  in  churches.  Sunday  after  Sunday,  day  after  day,  the 
crowds  that  gathered  round  Bonner's  Bibles  in  the  nave  of  St. 
Paul's,  or  the  family  group  that  hung  on  the  words  of  the  Geneva 
Bible  in  the  devotional  exercises  at  home,  were  leavened  with  a 
new  literature.  Legend  and  annal,  war-song  and  psalm,  state- 
roll  and  biography,  the  mighty  voices  of  prophets,  the  parables  of 
evangelists,  stories  of  mission  journeys,  of  perils  by  the  sea  and 
among  the  heathen,  philosophic  arguments,  apocalyptic  visions, 
all  were  flung  broadcast  over  minds  unoccupied  for  the  most  part 
by  any  rival  learning.  The  disclosure  of  the  stores  of  Greek 
literature  had  wrought  the  revolution  of  the  Renascence.  The 
disclosure  of  the  older  mass  of  Hebrew  literature  wrought  the 
revolution  of  the  Reformation.  But  the  one  revolution  was  far 
deeper  and  wider  in  its  effects  than  the  other.  No  version  could 
transfer  to  another  tongue  the  peculiar  charm  of  language  which 
gave  their  value  to  the  authors  of  Greece  and  Rome. 

Classical  letters,  therefore,  remained  in  the  possession  of  the 
learned,  that  is,  of  the  few;  and  among  these,  with  the  exception 
of  Colet  and  More,  or  of  the  pedants  who  revived  a  pagan  worship 
in  the  gardens  of  the  Florentine  Academy,  their  direct  influence 
was  purely  intellectual.  But  the  tongue  of  the  Hebrew,  the  idiom 
of  the  Hellenistic  Greek,  lent  themselves  with  curious  feJicity  to 
the  purposes  of  translation.  As  a  mere  literary  monument,  the 
English  version  of  the  Bible  remains  the  noblest  example  of  the 


The  Growth  of  Puritanism  323 

English  tongue,  while  its  perpetual  use  made  it  from  the  instant 
of  its  appearance  the  standard  of  our  language.  For  the  moment, 
however,  its  literary  effect  was  less  than  its  social.  The  power  of 
the  book  over  the  mass  of  Englishmen  showed  itself  in  a  thousand 
superficial  ways,  and  in  none  more  conspicuously  than  the  influ- 
ence it  exerted  on  ordinary  speech.  It  formed,  we  must  repeat, 
the  whole  literature  which  was  practically  accessible  to  ordinary 
Englishmen ;  and  when  we  recall  the  number  of  common  phrases 
which  we  owe  to  great  authors,  the  bits  of  Shakespeare,  or  Milton, 
or  Dickens,  or  Thackeray,  which  unconsciously  interweave  them- 
selves in  our  ordinary  talk,  we  shall  better  understand  the  strange 
mosaic  of  Biblical  words  and  phrases  which  colored  English 
talk  two  hundred  years  ago. 

The  mass  of  picturesque  allusion  and  illustration  which  we 
borrow  from  a  thousand  books,  our  fathers  were  forced  to  borrow 
from  one ;  and  the  borrowing  was  the  easier  and  the  more  natural 
that  the  range  of  the  Hebrew  literature  fitted  it  for  the  expression 
of  every  phase  of  feeling.  When  Spenser  poured  forth  his  warmest 
love-notes  in  the  Epithalamion  he  adopted  the  very  words  of 
the  Psalmist  as  he  bade  the  gates  open  for  the  entrance  of  his 
bride.  When  Cromwell  saw  the  mists  break  over  the  hills  of 
Dunbar,  he  hailed  the  sun-burst  with  the  cry  of  David :  "Let  God 
arise,  and  let  his  enemies  be  scattered.  Like  as  the  smoke  van- 
isheth,  so  shalt  thou  drive  them  away ! "  Even  to  common  minds 
this  familiarity  with  grand  poetic  imagery  in  prophet  and  apoca- 
lypse gave  a  loftiness  and  ardor  of  expression  that  with  all  its 
tendency  to  exaggeration  and  bombast  we  may  prefer  to  the  slip- 
shod vulgarisms  of  to-day. 

But  far  greater  than  its  effect  on  literature  or  social  phrase  was 
the  effect  of  the  Bible  on  the  character  of  the  people  at  large. 
Elizabeth  might  silence  or  tune  the  pulpits ;  but  it  was  impossible 
for  her  to  silence  or  tune  the  great  preachers  of  justice  and  mercy 
and  truth  who  spoke  from  the  book  which  she  had  again  opened 
for  her  people.  The  whole  moral  effect  which  is  produced  nowa- 
days by  the  religious  newspaper,  the  tract,  the  essay,  the  lecture, 
the  missionary  report,  the  sermon,  was  then  produced  by  the  Bible 
alone ;  and  its  effect  in  this  way,  however  dispassionately  we  ex- 
amine it,  was  simply  amazing.  One  dominant  influence  told  on 
human  action ;  and  all  the  activities  that  had  been  called  into  life 
by  the  age  that  was  passing  away  were  seized,  concentrated,  and 
steadied  to  a  definite  aim  by  the  spirit  of  religion.  The  whole 
temper  of  the  nation  felt  the  change.  A  new  conception  of  life 


324  English  Historians 

and  of  man  superseded  the  old.    A  new  moral  and  religious  im- 
pulse spread  through  every  class. 

Literature  reflected  the  general  tendency  of  the  time;  and  the 
dumpy  little  quartos  of  controversy  and  piety,  which  still  crowd 
our  older  libraries,  drove  before  them  the  classical  translations 
and  Italian  novelettes  of  the  age  of  the  Renascence.  "Theology 
rules  there,"  said  Grotius  of  England  only  two  years  after  Eliza- 
beth's death ;  and  when  Casaubon,  the  last  of  the  great  scholars 
of  the  sixteenth  century,  was  invited  to  England  by  King  James, 
he  found  both  king  and  people  indifferent  to  pure  letters.  "There 
is  great  abundance  of  theologians  in  England,"  he  said;  "all  point 
their  studies  in  that  direction."  Even  a  country  gentleman  like 
Colonel  Hutchinson  felt  the  theological  impulse.  "As  soon  as  he 
had  improved  his  natural  understanding  with  the  acquisition  of 
learning,  the  first  studies  he  exercised  himself  in  were  the  prin- 
ciples of  religion."  The  whole  nation  became,  in  fact,  a  Church. 
The  great  problems  of  life  and  death,  whose  questionings  found 
no  answer  in  the  higher  minds  of  Shakespeare's  day,  pressed  for  an 
answer  not  only  from  noble  and  scholar,  but  from  farmer  and  shop- 
keeper in  the  age  that  followed  him.  .  .  . 

§  2.   The  English  Church 

Elizabeth's  church  policy  rested  on  the  Acts  of  Supremacy  and 
of  Uniformity,  the  first  of  which  placed  all  ecclesiastical  juris- 
diction and  legislative  power  in  the  hands  of  the  State,  while  the 
second  prescribed  a  course  of  doctrine  and  discipline  from  which 
no  variation  was  legally  permissible.  For  the  nation  at  large 
Elizabeth's  system  was  no  doubt  a  wise  and  healthy  one.  Single- 
handed,  unsupported  by  any  of  the  statesmen  or  divines  about  her, 
the  queen  forced  on  the  warring  religions  a  sort  of  armed  truce. 
The  main  principles  of  the  Reformation  were  accepted,  but  the 
zeal  of  the  ultra-Reformers  was  held  at  bay.  The  Bible  was  left 
open,  private  discussion  was  unrestrained;  but  the  warfare  of 
pulpit  against  pulpit  was  silenced  by  the  licensing  of  preachers. 
Outer  conformity,  attendance  at  the  common  prayer,  was  exacted 
from  all ;  but  the  changes  in  ritual  by  which  the  zealots  of  Geneva 
gave  prominence  to  the  radical  features  of  the  religious  change 
which  was  passing  over  the  country  were  steadily  resisted.  While 
England  was  struggling  for  existence,  this  balanced  attitude  of  the 
crown  reflected  faithfully  enough  the  balanced  attitude  of  the 
nation ;.  but  with  the  declaration  of  war  by  the  papacy  in  the  Bull 


The  Growth  of  Puritanism  325 

of    Deposition  the  movement  in  favor  of    a  more   pronounced 
Protestantism  gathered  a  new  strength. 

Unhappily  the  queen  clung  obstinately  to  her  system  of  com- 
promise, weakened  and  broken  as  it  was.  With  the  religious  en- 
thusiasm which  was  growing  up  around  her  she  had  no  sympathy 
whatever.  Her  passion  was  for  moderation,  her  aim  was  simply 
civil  order;  and  both  order  and  moderation  were  threatened 
by  the  knot  of  clerical  bigots  who  gathered  under  the  banner  of 
Presbyterianism.  Of  these  Thomas  Cartwright  was  the  chief. 
He  had  studied  at  Geneva ;  he  returned  with  a  fanatical  faith  in 
Calvinism  and  in  the  system  of  church  government  which  Calvin 
had  devised  ;  and  as  Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity  at  Cambridge 
he  used  to  the  full  the  opportunities  which  his  chair  gave  him  of 
propagating  his  opinions.  No  leader  of  a  religious  party  ever 
deserved  less  of  after-sympathy  than  Cartwright.  He  was  un- 
questionably learned  and  devout,  but  his  bigotry  was  that  of  a 
mediaeval  inquisitor.  The  relics  of  the  old  ritual,  the  cross  in 
baptism,  the  surplice,  the  giving  of  a  ring  in  marriage,  were  to  him 
not  merely  distasteful,  as  they  were  to  the  Puritans  at  large,  they 
were  idolatrous  and  the  mark  of  the  beast.  His  declamation 
against  ceremonies  and  superstition,  however,  had  little  weight  with 
Elizabeth  or  her  primates;  what  scared  them  was  his  reckless 
advocacy  of  a  scheme  of  ecclesiastical  government  which  placed 
the  State  beneath  the  feet  of  the  Church.  The  absolute  rule  of 
bishops,  indeed,  he  denounced  as  begotten  of  the  Devil;  but  the 
absolute  rule  of  Presbyters  he  held  to  be  established  by  the  word 
of  God. 

For  the  Church  modelled  after  the  fashion  of  Geneva  he  claimed 
an  authority  which  surpassed  the  wildest  dreams  of  the  masters  of 
the  Vatican.  All  spiritual  authority  and  jurisdiction,  the  decree- 
ing of  doctrine,  the  ordering  of  ceremonies,  lay  wholly  in  the 
hands  of  the  ministers  of  the  Church.  To  them  belonged  the 
supervision  of  public  morals.  In  an  ordered  arrangement  of 
classes  and  synods  these  Presbyters  were  to  govern  their  flocks, 
to  regulate  their  own  order,  to  decide  in  matters  of  faith,  to  admin 
ister  "discipline." 

Their  weapon  was  excommunication,  and  they  were  responsible 
for  its  use  to  none  but  Christ.  The  province  of  the  civil  ruler  was 
simply  to  carry  out  the  decisions  of  the  Presbyters,  "to  see  their 
decrees  executed  and  to  punish  the  contemners  of  them."  The 
spirit  of  Calvinistic  Presbyterianism  excluded  all  toleration  of 
practice  or  belief.  Not  only  was  the  rule  of  ministers  to  be 


326  English  Historians 

established  as  the  one  legal  form  of  church  government,  but  all 
other  forms,  Episcopalian  and  Separatist,  were  to  be  ruthlessly 
put  down.  For  heresy  there  was  the  punishment  of  death.  Never 
had  the  doctrine  of  persecution  been  urged  with  such  a  blind  and 
reckless  ferocity.  "I  deny,"  wrote  Cartwright,  "that  upon  re- 
pentance there  ought  to  follow  any  pardon  of  death.  .  .  .  Here- 
tics ought  to  be  put  to  death  now.  If  this  be  bloody  and  extreme, 
I  am  content  to  be  so  counted  with  the  Holy  Ghost." 

§  3.   Repression  of  Dissent 

The  bold  challenge  to  the  government  which  was  delivered  by 
Cartwright's  party  in  a  daring  "admonition  to  the  Parliament," 
which  demanded  the  establishment  of  government  by  Presbyters, 
raised  a  panic  among  English  statesmen  and  prelates  which  cut 
off  all  hopes  of  a  quiet  appeal  to  reason.  It  is  probable  that,  but 
for  the  storm  which  Cartwright  raised,  the  steady  growth  of  gen- 
eral discontent  with  the  ceremonial  usages  he  denounced  would 
have  brought  about  their  abolition.  The  Parliament  of  1571  had 
not  only  refused  to  bind  the  clergy  to  subscription  to  three  articles 
on  the  supremacy,  the  form  of  church  government,  and  the  power 
of  the  Church  to  ordain  rites  and  ceremonies,  but  favored  the 
project  of  reforming  the  Liturgy  by  the  omission  of  the  super- 
stitious practices.  But  with  the  appearance  of  the  "Admonition  " 
this  natural  progress  of  opinion  abruptly  ceased.  The  moderate 
statesmen  who  had  pressed  for  a  change  in  ritual  withdrew  from 
union  with  a  party  which  revived  the  worst  pretensions  of  the 
papacy.  As  dangers  from  without  and  from  within  thickened 
round  the  queen,  the  growing  Puritanism  of  the  clergy  stirred  her 
wrath  above  measure,  and  she  met  the  growth  of  "non-conform- 
ing" ministers  by  a  measure  which  forms  the  worst  blot  on  her 
reign. 

The  new  powers  which  were  conferred  in  1583  on  the  Ecclesi- 
astical Commission  converted  the  religious  truce  into  a  spiritual 
despotism.  From  being  a  temporary  board  which  represented 
the  royal  supremacy  in  matters  ecclesiastical,  the  Commission 
was  now  turned  into  a  permanent  body  wielding  the  almost 
unlimited  powers  of  the  crown.  All  opinions  or  acts  contrary  to 
the  Statutes  of  Supremacy  and  Uniformity  fell  within  its  cog- 
nizance. A  right  of  deprivation  placed  the  clergy  at  its  mercy. 
It  had  power  to  alter  or  amend  the  statutes  of  colleges  or  schools. 
Not  only  heresy  and  schism  and  non-conformity,  but  incest  or 


The  Growth   of  Puritanism  327 

aggravated  adultery  were  held  to  fall  within  its  scope;  its  means 
of  inquiry  were  left  without  limit,  and  it  might  line  or  imprison 
at  its  will.  By  the  mere  establishment  of  such  a  court  half  the 
work  of  the  Reformation  was  undone.  The  large  number  of 
civilians  on  the  board  indeed  seemed  to  furnish  some  security 
against  the  excess  of  ecclesiastical  tyranny.  Of  its  forty-four 
commissioners,  however,  few  actually  took  any  part  in  its  proceed- 
ings; and  the  powers  of  the  Commission  were  practically  left  in 
the  hands  of  the  successive  primates.  No  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury since  the  days  of  Augustine  had  wielded  an  authority  so  vast, 
so  utterly  despotic,  as  that  of  Whitgift  and  Bancroft  and  Abbott 
and  Laud. 

The  most  terrible  feature  of  their  spiritual  tyranny  was  its 
wholly  personal  character.  The  old  symbols  of  doctrine  were 
gone,  and  the  lawyers  had  not  yet  stepped  in  to  protect  the  clergy 
by  denning  the  exact  limits  of  the  new.  The  result  was  that  at 
the  commission  board  at  Lambeth  the  primates  created  their  own 
tests  of  doctrine  with  an  utter  indifference  to  those  created  by  law. 
In  one  instance  Parker  deprived  a  vicar  of  his  benefice  for  a 
denial  of  the  verbal  inspiration  of  the  Bible.  Nor  did  the  suc- 
cessive archbishops  care  greatly  if  the  test  was  a  varying  or  a 
conflicting  one.  Whitgift  strove  to  force  on  the  Church  the 
Calvinistic  supralapsarianism  of  his  Lambeth  Articles.  Ban- 
croft, who  followed  him,  was  as  earnest  in  enforcing  his  anti- 
Calvinistic  dogma  of  the  divine  Right  of  the  episcopate.  Abbott 
had  no  mercy  for  Arminianism.  Laud  had  none  for  its  opponents. 
It  is  no  wonder  that  the  ecclesiastical  Commission,  which  these 
men  represented,  soon  stank  in  the  nostrils  of  the  English  clergy. 
Its  establishment,  however,  marked  the  adoption  of  a  more  resolute 
policy  on  the  part  of  the  crown,  and  its  efforts  were  backed  by 
stern  measures  of  repression.  All  preaching  or  reading  in  private 
houses  was  forbidden ;  and  in  spite  of  the  refusal  of  Parliament  to 
enforce  the  requirement  of  them  by  law,  subscription  to  the  Three 
Articles  was  exacted  from  every  member  of  the  clergy. 

For  the  moment  these  measures  were  crowned  with  success. 
The  movement  under  Cartwright  was  checked ;  Cartwright  him- 
self was  driven  from  his  professorship ;  and  an  outer  uniformity 
of  worship  was  more  and  more  brought  about  by  the  steady  press- 
ure of  the  Commission.  The  old  liberty  which  had  been  allowed 
in  London  and  the  other  Protestant  parts  of  the  kingdom  was 
no  longer  permitted  to  exist.  The  leading  Puritan  clergy,  whose 
non-conformity  had  hitherto  been  winked  at,  were  called  upon  to 


328  English  Historians 

submit  to  the  surplice,  and  to  make  the  sign  of  the  cross  in  bap- 
tism. The  remonstrances  of  the  country  gentry  availed  as  little 
as  the  protest  of  Lord  Burleigh  himself  to  protect  two  hundred  of 
the  best  ministers  from  being  driven  from  their  parsonages  on  a 
refusal  to  subscribe  to  the  Three  Articles.  But  the  persecution 
only  gave  fresh  life  and  popularity  to  the  doctrines  which  it  aimed 
at  crushing  by  drawing  together  two  currents  of  opinion  which 
were  in  themselves  perfectly  distinct.  The  Presbyterian  plat- 
form of  church  discipline  had  as  yet  been  embraced  by  the  clergy 
only,  and  by  few  among  the  clergy.  On  the  other  hand,  the  wish 
of  the  Puritans  for  a  reform  in  the  Liturgy,  the  dislike  of  "super- 
stitious usages,"  of  the  use  of  the  surplice,  the  sign  of  the  cross  in 
baptism,  the  gift  of  the  ring  in  marriage,  the  posture  of  kneeling 
at  the  Lord's  Supper,  was  shared  by  a  large  number  of  the  clergy 
and  laity  alike.  At  the  opening  of  Elizabeth's  reign  almost  all 
the  higher  churchmen  save  Parker  were  opposed  to  them,  and  a 
motion  in  convocation  for  their  abolition  was  lost  by  a  single  vote. 
The  temper  of  the  country  gentlemen  on  this  subject  was  indicated 
by  that  of  Parliament;  and  it  was  well  known  that  the  wisest 
of  the  queen's  councillors,  Burleigh,  Walsingham,  and  Knollys, 
were  at  one  in  this  matter  with  the  gentry.  If  their  common  per- 
secution did  not  wholly  succeed  in  fusing  these  two  sections  of 
religious  opinion  into  one,  it  at  any  rate  gained  for  the  Presby- 
terians a  general  sympathy  on  the  part  of  the  Puritans,  which 
raised  them  from  a  clerical  clique  into  a  popular  party.  Nor  were 
the  consequences  of  the  persecution  limited  to  the  strengthening 
of  the  Presbyterians. 

§  4.    The  Development  o)  Independency 

The  "Separatists,"  who  were  beginning  to  withdraw  from 
attendance  at  public  worship  on  the  ground  that  the  very  existence 
of  a  national  Church  was  contrary  to  the  Word  of  God,  grew  quickly 
from  a  few  scattered  zealots  to  twenty  thousand  souls.  Presby- 
terian and  Puritan  felt  as  bitter  an  abhorrence  as  Elizabeth  her- 
self of  the"  Brownists,"  as  they  were  nicknamed  after  their  founder, 
Robert  Brown.  Parliament,  Puritan  as  it  was,  passed  a  statute 
against  them.  Brown  himself  was  forced  to  fly  to  the  Nether- 
lands, and  of  his  followers  many  were  driven  into  exile.  So  great 
a  future  awaited  one  of  these  congregations  that  we  may  pause  to 
get  a  glimpse  of  "a  poor  people"  in  Lincolnshire  and  the  neigh- 
borhood, who  "being  enlightened  by  the  Word  of  God,"  and  their 


The  Growth  of  Puritanism  329 

members  "urged  with  the  yoke  of  subscription,"  had  been  led  "to 
see  further."  They  rejected  ceremonies  as  relics  of  idolatry,  the 
rule  of  bishops  as  unscriptural,  and  joined  themselves,  "as  the 
Lord's  free  people,"  into  "a  church  estate  on  the  fellowship  of  the 
Gospel."  Feeling  their  way  forward  to  the  great  principle  of 
liberty  of  conscience,  they  asserted  their  Christian  right  "to  walk 
in  all  the  ways  which  God  had  made  known  or  should  make  known 
to  them." 

Their  meetings  or  "conventicles"  soon  drew  down  the  heavy 
hand  of  the  law,  and  the  little  company  resolved  to  seek  a  refuge 
in  other  lands;  but  their  first  attempt  at  flight  was  prevented,  and 
when  they  made  another,  their  wives  and  children  were  seized 
at  the  very  moment  of  entering  the  ship.  At  last,  however,  the 
magistrates  gave  a  contemptuous  assent  to  their  project;  they 
were,  in  fact,  "glad  to  be  rid  of  them  at  any  price,"  and  the  fugi- 
tives found  shelter  at  Amsterdam,  from  whence  some  of  them, 
choosing  John  Robinson  as  their  minister,  took  refuge  in  1609 
at  Leyden.  "They  knew  they  were  pilgrims  and  looked  not  much 
on  these  things,  but  lifted  up  their  eyes  to  Heaven,  their  dearest 
country,  and  quieted  their  spirits."  Among  this  little  band  of 
exiles  were  those  who  were  to  become  famous  at  a  later  time  as 
the  Pilgrim  Fathers  of  the  Mayflower. 

It  was  easy  to  be  "rid"  of  the  Brownists;  but  the  political 
danger  of  the  course  on  which  the  crown  had  entered  was  seen 
in  the  rise  of  a  spirit  of  vigorous  opposition,  such  as  had  not  made 
its  appearance  since  the  accession  of  the  Tudors.  The  growing 
power  of  public  opinion  received  a  striking  recognition  in  the 
struggle  which  bears  the  name  of  the  "Martin  Marprelate  con- 
troversy." The  Puritans  had  from  the  first  appealed  by  their 
pamphlets  from  the  crown  to  the  people,  and  Whitgift  bore 
witness  to  their  influence  on  opinion  by  his  efforts  to  gag  the  press. 
The  regulations  of  the  Star  Chamber  for  this  purpose  are  mem- 
orable as  the  first  step  in  the  long  struggle  of  government  after 
government  to  check  the  liberty  of  printing.  The  irregular  cen- 
sorship which  had  long  existed  was  now  finally  organized.  Print- 
ing was  restricted  to  London  and  the  two  universities,  the  number 
of  printers  reduced,  and  all  candidates  for  license  to  print  were 
placed  under  the  supervision  of  the  Company  of  Stationers. 
Every  publication,  too,  great  or  small,  had  to  receive  the  appro- 
bation of  the  Primate  or  the  Bishop  of  London. 

The  first  result  of  this  system  of  repression  was  the  appearance, 
in  the  very  year  of  the  Armada,  of  a  series  of  anonymous  pam- 


330  English  Historians 

phlets  bearing  the  significant  name  of  "Martin  Marprelate,"  and 
issued  from  a  secret  press  which  found  refuge  from  the  royal 
pursuivants  in  the  country  houses  of  the  gentry.  The  press  was 
at  last  seized ;  and  the  suspected  authors  of  these  scurrilous  libels, 
Penry,  a  young  Welshman,  and  a  minister  named  Udall,  died,  the 
one  in  prison,  the  other  on  the  scaffold.  But  the  virulence  and 
boldness  of  their  language  produced  a  powerful  effect,  for  it  was 
impossible  under  the  system  of  Elizabeth  to  "mar"  the  bishops 
without  attacking  the  crown;  and  a  new  age  of  political  liberty 
was  felt  to  be  at  hand  when  Martin  Marprelate  forced  the  political 
and  ecclesiastical  measures  of  the  government  into  the  arena  of 
public  discussion.  The  suppression,  indeed,  of  these  pamphlets 
was  far  from  damping  the  courage  of  the  Presbyterians.  Cart- 
wright,  who  had  been  appointed  by  Lord  Leicester  to  the  master- 
ship of  an  hospital  at  Warwick,  was  bold  enough  to  organize  his 
system  of  church  discipline  among  the  clergy  of  that  county  and 
of  Northamptonshire.  His  example  was  widely  followed,  and 
the  general  gatherings  of  the  whole  ministerial  body  of  the  clergy 
and  the  smaller  assemblies  for  each  diocese  or  shire,  which  in  the 
Presbyterian  scheme  bore  the  name  of  synods  and  classes,  began 
to  be  held  in  many  parts  of  England  for  the  purposes  of  debate 
and  consultation.  The  new  organization  was  quickly  suppressed, 
indeed,  but  Cartwright  was  saved  from  the  banishment  which 
Whitgift  demanded  by  a  promise  of  submission;  his  influence 
steadily  increased,  and  the  struggle,  transferred  to  the  higher 
sphere  of  the  Parliament,  widened  into  the  great  contest  for  liberty 
under  James  and  the  civil  war  under  his  successor. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Marsden,  History  of  the  Early  Puritans,  2nd  cd.,  1853.  Masson,  Life 
of  Milton,  see  Index  under  title  "Puritanism."  Illustrative  materials  in 
Prothero,  Statutes  and  Constitutional  Documents. 


PART  V 

THE  STUART  CONSTITUTIONAL  CONFLICT 
CHAPTER  I 

OPENING   OF    THE    CONSTITUTIONAL    STRUGGLE   UNDER   JAMES   I 

BEFORE  the  death  of  Queen  Elizabeth  there  were  many  indica- 
tions that  the  nation  was  growing  restless  under  the  arbitrary 
practices  which  characterized  Tudor  absolutism.  The  bestowal 
of  trade  monopolies  on  private  persons  had  been  the  subject  of 
Parliamentary  protest  and  the  queen  had  promised  relief;  the 
custom  of  demanding  freedom  from  arrest  and  liberty  of  speech 
for  members  had  been  fixed  towards  the  close  of  her  reign;  and 
several  times  Commons  had  asserted  the  right  of  settling  disputed 
election  questions.  Moreover,  as  we  have  seen,  there  were  grow- 
ing parties  seeking  to  reform  or  subvert  the  Established  Church, 
thus  coming  into  conflict  with  the  crown  as  the  chief  defender  of 
the  faith. 

It  was  under  such  circumstances  that  James  I  ascended  the 
throne  of  England.  The  number  of  members  that  attended  the 
meeting  of  his  first  Parliament  was  itself  an  indication  of  the  in- 
creasing interest  of  the  country  in  political  affairs  and  the  har- 
binger of  many  a  struggle  to  come.  Unfortunately  James  was 
fitted  neither  by  temper  nor  training  for  the  task  of  governing  at 
this  time  when  tact  and  conciliation  were  indispensable  to  harmony, 
and  at  the  very  outset  he  initiated  the  quarrel  which  was  destined 
to  fill  the  seventeenth  century  with  turmoil. 

§  i.   James  I  and  the  Puritans  1 

In  the  gray  hours  of  morning,  March  24,  1603,  watch  and 
ward  was  kept  in  London  streets;  and  in  all  the  neighboring 

1  Trevelyan,  England  under  the  Stuarts,  pp.  73  ff.  By  permission  of 
G.  M.  Trevelyan,  Esq.,  and  G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons,  Publishers. 

331 


332  English  Historians 

counties  men  who  had  much  at  stake  in  time  of  crisis  wove  un- 
certain plans  to  meet  the  thousand  chances  that  day  might  bring. 
For  the  last  and  greatest  of  the  Tudor  race  had  at  length  turned 
away  to  die,  like  one  of  her  old  Plantagenet  ancestry,  in  fierce  mood 
of  scorn  for  the  world  which  her  patient  valor  had  led  into  the 
forward  path.  Her  death  would  bring  about  one  of  those  rare 
occasions  when  the  platitudes  of  national  loyalty  and  unity,  which 
have  imposed  on  secure  men  for  a  whole  generation,  are  put  to 
the  test  of  the  event.  It  would  now  be  seen  whether  all  was  really 
as  officials  asserted  it  to  be;  whether  the  new  England  had  been 
built  to  stand  for  ages;  or  whether,  after  all,  the  party  of  the  old 
religion  and  society  was  large,  united,  and  determined  enough  to 
bring  down  all  in  ruin. 

When  day  broke  two  horsemen  were  far  on  the  northern  road, 
each  spurring  to  forestall  the  other  at  Holyrood  with  homage  im- 
patiently expected  by  the  first  ruler  of  the  British  Isles.  At  a 
more  leisurely  pace  the  Elizabethan  statesmen  were  riding  in  from 
Richmond,  where  their  mistress  lay  dead,  to  Whitehall  gate,  where 
at  ten  in  the  morning  they  proclaimed  King  James  I.  By  employ- 
ing as  their  spokesman  Robert  Cecil,  who  personified  the  late 
queen's  system  in  Church  and  State,  the  Lords  of  the  Council 
showed  themselves  agreed  that  there  should  be  no  revolution.  The 
decision  was  silently  indorsed  by  a  grateful  nation.  In  city  and 
manor  house  men  laid  aside  their  arms  and  breathed  again.  Fast 
as  the  news  spread,  all  consented  and  most  rejoiced.  The  Puri- 
tan sailors,  who  had  taken  out  their  ships  to  guard  against  Popish 
invasion  from  the  Flemish  coast,  put  back  to  port;  and  the  border- 
ers who  kept  watch  on  Na worth  turrets,  learned  from  their  mild 
Catholic  lord,  Belted  Will  Howard,  that,  since  England  and 
Scotland  had  one  king,  the  northern  sky-line  was  no  longer  the 
territory  of  a  foe.  So  the  work  of  Elizabeth  stood  the  test  of  real 
consent,  and  the  English  people  invited  the  royal  line  of  Scotland 
to  come  and  fill  her  place. 

The  first  of  these  four  Stuarts  who  have  left  their  indelible 
negative  impression  upon  England  ushered  in  the  tragedy  of 
king  and  people  with  a  pageant  of  royal  progress  from  Berwick 
to  London,  which  then  excited  to  ecstasies  the  loyalty  and  curi- 
osity of  a  simple  nation,  and  has  since,  in  the  reflex  light  of  all 
that  followed,  become  a  theme  for  the  irony  of  historians.  For 
a  month  of  spring  weather  James  rode  south.  The  land  seemed 
bursting  into  bud  to  welcome  him,  growing  greener  each  day  as 
the  ever  increasing  train  of  courtiers  wound  slowly  down  out  of 


The  Constitutional  Struggle  under  James   I      333 

the  north  country  into  the  midland  valleys;  through  shouting 
market-places  where  the  masque  of  welcome  and  the  corporation 
with  its  address  were  lost  in  the  press  of  men ;  by  ancient  steeples 
rocking  with  the  clash  of  bells;  along  open  roads  hedged  with 
countrymen  who  had  come  on  pilgrimage  across  whole  counties. 
There  was  hunting  of  the  stag  through  the  neighboring  parks, 
when  his  Majesty  might  learnedly  discourse  to  the  foresters  on  the 
art  o(  venery,  and  show  how  your  Scotchman  ,will  blow  a  mort ; 
while  at  night,  in  private  mansions,  the  regal  entertainment  wit- 
nessed to  the  solid  magnificence  and  free  loyalty  of  England. 

The  man  on  whom  the  English  thus  first  set  eyes  was  by  no  means 
contemptible  in  person,  in  spite  of  grossly  coarse  manners.  In  the 
prime  of  life,  over  middle  height,  a  good  horseman,  devoted  to  the 
chase,  drinking  hugely  but  never  overcome  by  his  liquor,  he 
employed  a  pithy  wit  and  a  wealth  of  homely  images  and  learned 
conceits  in  free  and  familiar  discourse  with  all.  Nor  during  the 
progress  did  he  dispel  the  prejudice  in  his  favor. 

Above  all  he  gave  satisfaction  by  keeping  Robert  Cecil  as  his 
chief  counsellor.  He  had,  in  fact,  determined  to  maintain  the 
system  of  Elizabeth,  with  this  good  change,  —  that  henceforth  the 
royal  policy  should  display  an  acuteness  and  a  largeness  of  mind 
worthy  of  a  man  of  uncommon  penetration  and  learning,  who 
knew  by  theory  how  to  outwit  the  pope,  manage  the  king  of  Spain, 
convert  the  English  Catholics  by  proclamations,  and  guide  his 
other  subjects  on  the  path  of  unity  and  wisdom.  The  English 
people  having  been  loyal  even  to  Elizabeth,  probably  from  their 
sense  of  the  obedience  due  by  right  divine  to  all  rulers,  would  be 
doubly  loyal  to  one  like  himself,  the  living  symbol  of  justice  and 
reconciliation,  the  "Restorer,"  as  he  loved  to  hear,  "of  perpetual 
peace  in  Church  and  Commonwealth." 

His  naturally  authoritative  temper  HI  politics  was  flattered 
both  by  his  theories  and  his  experience.  His  dogma  of  the  Divine 
Right  of  kings  was  gleaned  from  the  new  theory  of  State  now  in 
favor  among  the  monarchies  of  the  Continent,  better  known  to 
him  than  to  his  more  ignorant  and  insular  English  subjects; 
while  his  experience  of  Scottish  kingship  had  led  him,  during  the 
years  of  life  when  opinions  are  formed,  to  see  how  necessary  is 
royal  authority  to  tame  a  fierce  baronage  and  a  frantic  clergy. 
But  he  had  devoted  none  of  his  studious  hours  to  the  department 
of  learning  that  now  most  concerned  him.  He  knew  nothing  of 
the  peculiar  laws  and  liberties  of  England,  either  in  the  spirit  or 
the  letter;  he  began  by  ordering  a  cut-purse  who  had  been  caught 


334  English  Historians 

preying  on  the  crowd  as  he  passed  through  Newark  to  be  hanged 
without  trial.  When  too  late  in  life  to  profit  by  new  knowledge, 
he  discovered  the  existence  of  constitutional  custom  and  Parlia- 
mentary privilege;  he  set  them  down  in  his  logical  mind  as  tire- 
some anomalies  hampering  government  in  its  benevolent  course. 
Nor  would  he  consider  local  sentiment  and  English  national 
jealousy,  except  to  despise  them  as  forces  disintegrating  his  plans 
of  peace  and  union. 

As  a  man,  James  was  one  whom  it  is  easy  to  love  or  to  despise, 
but  impossible  to  hate.  Though  every  inch  a  pedant,  he  was 
human  —  far  more  human  than  his  more  noble  and  reserved  suc- 
cessor. His  instinct  to  sympathize  warmly,  except  when  annoyed 
or  prejudiced,  with  any  one  who  spoke  to  him,  led  to  rapid  and 
unconscious  vacillations  in  his  conduct.  The  more  intimate 
friendships  which  were  a  necessity  to  his  life,  counteracted  yet 
more  disastrously  his  excellent  intentions  as  a  ruler.  Choosing 
his  favorites  for  no  other  merit  but  their  charm  as  companions, 
he  was  too  fond  to  deny  them  anything.  Their  power  for  evil 
was  the  greater,  because  he  himself  hated  the  details  of  admin- 
istration, and  loved  to  live  in  the  abstract  heights  of  a  general 
scheme,  oblivious  of  the  monstrous  distortions  to  which  a  plan  is 
liable  in  action,  and  the  terrible  wrongs  for  which  even  a  love  of 
justice,  if  it  despises  diligence,  can  easily  be  made  the  cloak. 

Beneath  all  his  carelessness  as  to  the  ordering  of  his  court, 
and  in  seeing  to  the  execution  of  his  commands,  lay  a  will  stub- 
bornly adherent  to  a  main  course  of  a  policy  through  years  of 
ominous  failure,  when  once  he  had  persuaded  himself  that  king- 
craft required  a  certain  attitude,  whether  towards  Spain,  towards 
the  Puritans,  or  towards  Parliament.  Opposition,  even  if  couched 
in  reverent  terms,  aroused  neither  his  admiration  nor  his  curiosity, 
but  only  his  spleen.  Ofc  cruelty,  indeed,  he  had  none.  An  op- 
ponent, especially  if  a  subject,  was  a  pitiable  thing  to  be  lectured 
and  set  aside.  If,  as  in  the  case  of  his  later  Parliaments,  oppo- 
sition became  too  strong,  he  would  resort  to  concession,  but  not 
to  conciliation  or  to  a  change  of  front. 

His  most  fatal  defect  was  that,  in  spite  of  great  acuteness  and 
some  originality  in  discovering  points  of  vantage  for  himself  and 
detecting  weakness  in  his  adversaries'  position,  he  could  never  tell 
a  good  man  from  a  rogue,  or  a  wise  man  from  a  fool ;  still  less 
could  he  distinguish  the  great  currents  of  opinion  and  the  main 
tide  of  political  force  from  the  bright,  shallow  eddies  that  catch 
and  please  a  monarch's  eye.  The  patriotism  of  Eliot  repelled 


The  Constitutional  Struggle  under  James   I      335 

him;  the  large  political  wisdom  of  Bacon  appeared  to  him  a  rush- 
light rival  to  his  own  royal  beam;  the  daring  and  unquiet  genius 
of  Raleigh  was  opposed  alike  to  his  peaceful  instincts  and  his 
pedestrian  intellect.  Turning  from  all  this  varied  wealth  of  ex- 
cellence, he  deliberately  chose  Carr  and  Villiers.  One  who  thus 
judged  of  persons,  was  not  likely  to  understand  the  real  problems 
with  which  his  kingcraft  had  in  fact  to  deal ;  to  penetrate  the  soul 
of  Puritanism,  or  to  recognize  any  purpose  beyond  that  of  thwart- 
ing good  government,  in  the  turbulent  faction  of  the  House  of 
Commons. 

In  the  first  three  years  of  James'  English  rule,  each  of  the  great 
problems  of  the  coming  century  took  an  irrevocable  turn.  Against 
Puritans  and  against  Parliament  the  king  adopted  in  1604  a 
position  from  which  his  stubborn  character  afterwards  forbade 
him  to  retreat,  and,  by  the  time  his  son  succeeded  him,  the  con- 
tinuous traditions  of  a  long  reign  had  established  this  principle 
as  the  very  first  of  royal  policy.  In  the  same  year,  1604,  by  mak- 
ing a  wise  peace  with  Spain,  he  prepared  the  way  for  his  foolish 
friendship  with  Catholic  powers  which  soon  alienated  nationalist 
feeling  from  the  throne.  In  the  winter  of  1605  his  attempt  to 
secure  the  loyalty  of  the  Papists  by  holding  out  alternately  the 
olive  branch  and  the  sword  ended  in  the  Gunpowder  treason; 
the  event  gave  only  a  momentary  impulse  to  the  ever  vacillating 
conduct  of  the  Stuart  monarchs  towards  their  Catholic  subjects, 
but  it  excited  popular  imagination  to  a  panic  which  lasted  with 
slight  intermissions  for  more  than  a  century.  Thus  all  the  main 
causes  that  twice  combined  to  drive  the  Stuarts  from  the  throne 
were  in  three  fatal  years  set  in  motion  by  an  overwise  king. 

Already  during  his  progress  from  Scotland  the  new  king  had 
been  met  by  the  "Millenary  Petition,"  presented  by  several  hun- 
dred conformist  Puritan  clergy,  in  the  hope  that  the  doubtful 
toleration  afforded  them  within  the  Elizabethan  establishment, 
might  under  the  new  regime  be  changed  for  a  secure  and  legal- 
ized comprehension.  They  were  serving  the  Episcopal  Church 
with  sufficient  loyalty  to  her  form  of  government  and  her  Prayer- 
book  service,  and  with  a  missionary  zeal  and  a  pastoral  energy 
to  which  no  other  section  could  pretend.  In  return  they  now  asked, 
not  for  supremacy,  but  for  security.  The  petitioners  suggested 
that  a  clergyman  should  be  allowed  to  choose  for  himself  whether 
he  would  wear  cap  and  surplice,  and  that  he  should  not  be  re- 
quired to  declare  his  belief  in  the  absolute  truth  of  the  whole  Prayer 
Book,  provided  he  signed  the  Articles  and  used  the  service.  The 


336  English   Historians 

royal  reply  would  be  a  test  of  much  besides;  if  the  new  king  was 
ready  to  tolerate  Puritanism  within  the  pale  of  the  national  Church, 
he  would  be  ready  to  leave  these  points  optional. 

Other  items  of  the  Millenary  Petition  —  the  disuse  of  the  sign 
of  the  cross  in  baptism  and  the  bowing  at  the  name  of  Jesus,  the 
abridgment  of  the  service,  the  simplification  of  music  and  chant- 
ing, the  encouragement  of  preaching  and  sermons,  the  prevention 
of  ecclesiastical  pluralities  and  sinecures,  the  observance  of  Sun- 
day, the  non-observance  of  saints'  days  —  were  such  as  a  wise 
monarch  might  have  refused  or  left  unanswered,  on  the  ground 
than  any  strict  order  favoring  the  Puritans  on  these  points  would 
give  offence  to  many  clergy  and  to  many  congregations.  But  the 
moderation  of  even  these  requests,  so  different  from  the  demand 
for  the  abolition  of  the  episcopate  haughtily  advanced  thirty  years 
before,  show  the  humble  and  conformist  spirit  of  Puritanism  at 
this  auspicious  moment,  which  James  the  peacemaker  was  fated 
to  throw  away. 

In  January,  1604,  the  king  presided  at  Hampton  Court  over  a 
conference  summoned  to  consider  the  Petition.  The  bishops 
came  up  determined  to  oppose  all  compromise.  As  the  death 
struggle  against  Catholicism  gave  ever  more  apparent  promise  of 
triumph,  the  Protestant  zeal  originally  shown  by  Elizabeth's 
bishops  had  begun  to  cool;  and  when  Cartwright  had  made  his 
Presbyterian  attack  on  their  authority,  they  had  grafted  on  to 
their  Erastian  pride  of  church  office  under  the  crown  the  yet 
loftier  pretension  that  episcopal  government  is  of  Divine  origin. 
Bancroft,  Bishop  of  London,  the  champion  of  the  new  theory, 
took  the  lead  at  Hampton  Court.  On  the  second  day  of  the 
session,  when  the  principal  demands  of  the  Millenary  Petition 
were  to  be  discussed,  he  began  by  asking  James  to  silence  the 
Puritan  divines  on  the  high  ground  that  Canon  Law  forbade 
schismatics  to  be  heard  against  their  bishops,  and  then  tried  to 
raise  a  silly  laugh  against  the  "Turkey  gowns"  in  which  the  good 
men  had  thought  fit  to  appear  at  the  conference.  But  James  was 
not  going  to  lose  the  chance  of  a  disputation.  Rebuking  Ban- 
croft's unfairness,  he  assumed  the  part  of  the  good-humored 
and  talkative  umpire  of  debate,  hearing  all  in  full,  but  deciding 
point  after  point  against  the  Puritan  spokesman,  Dr.  Reynolds. 
The  session,  however,  came  to  a  more  stormy  close.  Reynolds 
proposed  that  the  lower  clergy  should  have  the  right  of  meeting 
in  conference,  and  that  the  bishop  should  consult  the  synod  of 
the  diocese.  At  the  word  synod,  redolent  to  James  of  the  daily 


The  Constitutional  Struggle  under  James   I      337 

humiliations  of  his  youth  among  the  rude  lieutenants  of  Knox, 
the  petulance  which  was  always  chafing  under  the  crust  of  his  learn- 
ing and  wisdom  burst  out  in  loose  native  fury.  "If  you  aim  at  a 
Scottish  Presbytery,"  he  cried,  "it  agreeth  as  well  with  a  mon- 
archy as  God  and  the  Devil."  Seizing  up  his  hat  to  dismiss  the 
assembly,  he  poured  out,  in  a  strain  of  colloquial  epigram,  the 
secret  of  the  personal  passion  that  dictated  his  policy:  "How  they 
used  the  poor  lady,  my  mother,  is  not  unknown,  and  how  they  dealt 
with  me  in  my  minority.  I  thus  apply  it.  ...  No  bishop,  no 
king.  .  .  .  Well,  Doctor,  have  you  anything  more  to  say?"- 
"No  more,  if  it  please  your  Majesty."  "If  this  be  all  your  party 
hath  to  say,  I  will  make  them  conform  themselves,  or  else  will 
harry  them  out  of  the  land."  "In  two  minutes,"  as  Gardiner 
says,  "he  had  sealed  his  own  fate  and  that  of  England  forever." 

On  many  points  James  was  not  out  of  sympathy  with  the  Puri- 
tans. Unlike  Charles  I,  he  was  not  brought  up  in  the  atmosphere 
of  Anglicanism;  he  cared  nothing  for  ritual;  he  was  a  Calvinist 
in  doctrine,  and  when  he  first  entered  England  he  was  anxious 
to  promote  in  his  half-Catholic  kingdom  the  pastoral  and  mis- 
sionary propaganda  which  the  Puritans  alone  carried  on,  in  spite 
of  episcopal  discouragement.  He  had  wished  to  settle  endow- 
ments for  the  maintenance  of  preachers,  until  Archbishop  Whit- 
gift  persuaded  him  that  much  preaching  was  a  dangerous  inno- 
vation. But  the  one  point  on  which  he  differed  completely  from 
the  Puritans  was  the  relative  authority  of  the  bishops  and  their 
clergy.  It  was,  in  fact,  not  for  speculative  nor  religious,  but  for 
political,  reasons  that  he  disliked  the  Puritans.  He  saw  in  them 
the  sect  that  in  Scotland  had  made  his  youth  one  long  humiliation, 
his  manhood  one  long  struggle  —  men  who  would  take  the  Lord's 
Anointed  by  the  sleeve  and  call  him  "God's  silly  vassal."  The 
English  Puritans  were  at  this  stage  of  their  career  of  a  milder 
temper;  but  the  policy  of  suppression  by  which  James  thought  to 
"harry  them  out  of  the  land"  served  to  arouse  in  them  the  in- 
stincts which  he  most  feared,  and  led  them  indeed  to  abolish  bishops 
and  to  put  his  son  to  death. 

When  his  first  Parliament  met  in  the  spring  of  1604,  the  House 
of  Commons  supported  the  Millenary  Petition  and  the  arguments 
of  Dr.  Reynolds.  It  escaped  the  king  how  ominous  was  the  alli- 
ance ;  how  considerable  the  fact  that  the  flustered  divines  who  had 
picked  up  their  Turkey  gowns  and  scurried  from  his  presence 
amid  the  laughter  of  bishops  represented  the  religion  of  the 
gentry  and  the  towns  of  England.  Such  considerations  gave  him 


33  8  English  Historians 

no  pause.  It  was  enough  for  him  to  lecture  Parliament  on  "Puri- 
tans and  Novelists,"  "which  I  call  a  sect  rather  than  a  religion," 
"who  do  not  so  far  differ  from  us  in  points  of  religion  as  in  their 
confused  form  of  policy  and  parity."  In  that  sentence  James 
summed  up  the  mistake  of  his  life.  Because  the  Puritan  leaders 
of  the  previous  generation  had  desired  a  Presbyterian  "policy" 
of  church  government,  and  a  "parity"  of  clergy  with  their  bishops, 
therefore  the  services  and  merits  of  all  Puritans  were  to  be  over- 
looked; they  were  at  once  to  be  deprived  of  their  benefices,  and 
finally,  together  with  all  their  lay  adherents,  "harried  out  of  the 
land."  James  did  not  perceive  that  if  they  were  allowed  to  con- 
tinue their  work  in  the  Church  and  to  take  their  fair  place  on  the 
episcopal  bench, 'the  desire  for  "parity"  would  be  kept  in  the 
background;  while  on  the  other  hand,  if  they  were  driven  out  by 
the  bishops,  the  Presbyterian  "policy"  would  revive,  with  the  arm 
of  the  House  of  Commons  for  its  support. 

As  soon  as  Parliament  had  risen  in  July,  the  king  informed  the 
clergy  by  proclamation  that  unless  before  December  they  were  ready 
to  conform  to  all  existing  rules  of  church  service,  they  would 
then  be  deprived  of  their  livings.  When  the  fatal  month  came 
round,  Bancroft  himself,  elevated  to  the  See  of  Canterbury,  as  a 
new  broom  to  sweep  the  Church  clean,  eagerly  set  himself  to  carry 
out  the  orders  of  the  king's  council.  All  curates  and  unbeneficed 
preachers  were  required  to  sign  a  statement  that  the  Prayer  Book 
contained  nothing  contrary  to  the  Word  of  God ;  and  the  beneficed 
clergy,  while  excused  this  severer  test,  were  required  to  obey  the 
rubric  in  every  detail.  Three  hundred  refused  and  were  ejected. 
Many  of  the  most  influential  and  conscientious  of  the  servants  of 
the  Church  were  driven  to  the  position  of  sectarians.  Till  then, 
the  only  schism  from  the  English  Church  had  been  the  voluntary 
secession  of  the  Brownists  and  a  few  other  protomartyrs  of  the 
Congregational  system,  who  were  hated  by  the  average  Puritan 
almost  as  much  as  by  the  bishops.  But  now  an  important  group 
of  churchmen,  forcibly  expelled,  gathered  round  them  large  con- 
gregations of  admirers.  The  "silenced  brethren,"  as  they  were 
called,  became  a  living  reproach  to  the  numerous  Puritan  clergy 
who  remained  in  the  Church,  a  witness  of  the  honors  of  martyr- 
dom and  the  injustice  of  episcopal  government.  This,  the  first 
of  the  great  ejections  for  conscience'  sake  that  mark  the  history 
of  the  reformed  English  Church,  began  a  cycle  of  revolutionary 
tests,  which  after  weeding  out  in  turn  the  more  scrupulous  cham- 
pions of  Puritanism  and  of  Anglicanism,  at  the  end  of  a  hundred 


The  Constitutional  Struggle  under  James   I      339 

years  left  the  Vicar  of  Bray  as  the  type  of  an  English  clergyman  in 
the  eighteenth  century.  .  .  . 

§  2.   The  English  Parliament  in  the  Seventeenth  Century 

The  forms  and  functions  of  the  English  Parliament  were  derived 
from  mediaeval  origins.  The  baron,  able,  when  he  chose,  to  let 
war  loose  over  the  land  from  his  castle-yard,  consented  to  spare 
his  country  so  long  as  he  was  compensated  with  an  hereditary 
share  in  the  counsels  of  State.  The  gentleman,  the  burgess,  and 
the  yeoman,  in  days  when  the  central  power  could  do  little  to 
strengthen  the  hands  of  the  tax  collector  against  the  passive 
resistance  of  a  scattered  population,  consented  to  fill  the  royal 
treasury,  so  long  as  they  were  consulted  as  to  the  amount  and  re- 
assured as  to  the  necessity  of  the  royal  demands.  Such  was  the 
original  meaning  of  the  House  of  Lords  and  of  the  House  of 
Commons. 

The  Tudors  retained  the  forms  but  altered  the  significance  of 
our  Parliamentary  institutions.  By  destroying  the  barons  and 
their  armies,  the  king  removed  the  only  political  power  that  could 
presume  to  name  his  ministries  or  dictate  his  policy.  Having 
thus  enslaved  the  Lords,  he  could  safely  make  use  of  the  Lower 
House.  Urged  and  directed  by  the  Tudor  monarchs,  the  Com- 
mons entered  into  a  career  of  legislative  activity  for  which  there 
had  been  no  scope  in  the  more  conservative  ages  gone  by.  As  the 
royal  instrument  of  religious  and  social  reconstruction,  they  gained 
prestige  while  they  lost  independence.  At  a  time  when  the  Habs- 
burgs  and  Valois  were  jealously  trenching  on  the  ancient  liberties 
of  their  Cortez  and  Etats  Gen^raux,  the  English  Parliament  pre- 
served its  privileges  and  increased  its  functions  by  becoming  part 
of  the  theory  and  practice  of  English  absolutism. 

In  the  days  of  the  Plantagenet  and  Lancastrian  dynasties,  Par- 
liament acted  as  opposition.  But  in  those  days  it  had  been  the 
peers  who  stirred  up  the  Commons  to  criticise  the  king's  finance, 
and  protected  them  when  they  impeached  his  servants.  When, 
therefore,  the  military  power  of  the  Lords  had  been  destroyed  in 
the  Wars  of  the  Roses,  the  element  of  opposition  disappeared  from 
both  houses  together.  During  the  century  that  divided  the  battle 
of  Bosworth  from  the  defeat  of  the  Armada,  the  Commons,  while 
they  forgot  how  to  resist  the  king,  learnt  to  be  independent  of 
the  Lords.  In  the  last  years  of  Elizabeth,  signs  of  a  revival  of 
opposition  came  not  from  the  Upper  but  from  the  Lower  House; 


340  English  Historians 

under  the  management  of  James,  the  Commons  developed  a  new 
tradition  of  political  resistance,  under  a  new  class  of  leaders,  and 
created  constitutional  precedents  more  novel  in  reality  than  they 
were  in  law. 

'The  House  of  Commons  represented  all  the  independent  classes, 
not  as  separate  and  jealous  "estates,"  but  as  friendly  partners 
in  a  common  political  heritage.  The  farmer  and  agricultural 
laborer,  since  they  enjoyed  no  social  independence,  exercised  no 
political  franchise.  But  yeomen  freeholders,  though  they  seldom 
if  ever  aspired  to  sit  in  Parliament,  decided  by  their  votes  between 
the  knights,  squires,  and  baronets,  who  courted  them  hat  in  hand 
on  market  days,  when  the  writs  were  travelling  down  from  Lon- 
don. The  yeomen  were  devotedly  attached  to  the  privileges  of 
Parliament,  and  the  principle  of  no  taxation  without  representa- 
tion :  these  watchwords  were  specially  associated  with  their  class 
pride  as  freeholders.  As  Fuller  quaintly  expresses  it,  the  yeoman 

"hath  a  great  stroke  in  making  a  Knight  of  the  shire.  Good  reason,  for 
he  makes  a  whole  line  in  the  Subsidy  book,  not  caring  how  much  his  purse 
is  let  blood,  so  it  be  done  by  the  advice  of  the  physicians  of  State." 

But  the  feature  most  distinctive  of  the  English  Parliament  was 
the  method  of  mutual  accommodation  by  which  the  gentry  and 
the  burgesses  shared  between  them  the  anomalous  representative 
system.  The  life  and  the  wealth  of  England  were  to  be  found 
chiefly  in  the  farm  and  the  manor  house,  yet  the  Chamber  that 
represented  her  opinion  contained  only  ninety-two  members  for  the 
counties,  and  some  four  hundred  members  for  the  towns.  And 
yet,  in  practice,  the  country  gentlemen  were  well  represented,  for 
it  was  they  who  sat  for  the  boroughs.  In  the  official  returns  of 
each  Parliament  we  only  find  the  name  of  a  score  of  "merchants," 
"aldermen,"  "recorders,"  and  "mayors";  the  remaining  three 
hundred  and  fifty  and  odd  borough  members,  with  the  exception 
of  a  few  "sergeants-at-law,"  are  entitled  "baronets,"  "knights," 
"esquires,"  and  "gentlemen."  Although  a  certain  number  of  the 
boroughs  were  Cornish  villages  in  the  hands  of  the  crown  or  of 
private  landowners,  the  proportion  was  not  in  the  seventeenth 
century  large;  the  bulk  of  the  elections  were  genuine  contests. 
Corruption  of  voters  by  money  was  not  so  general  as  it  afterward 
became,  but  the  power  of  great  neighboring  families  was  felt  in  the 
smaller  towns,  sometimes,  probably  in  a  very  sinister  manner. 
But  in  many  cases  the  English  burghers  deliberately  preferred  to 
look  outside  their  own  class  for  a  member.  Except  the  men  of 
London,  Bristol,  and  Plymouth,  who  usually  chose  one  of  their 


The  Constitutional   Struggle  under  James   I      341 

merchant  princes,  the  shopkeepers  considered  that  the  privileges 
of  Parliament  were  treated  with  more  respect  and  their  own  in- 
terests with  more  attention,  when  the  market  towns  of  Bucking- 
hamshire sent  up  such  neighbors  as  the  Verneys  and  the  Hampdens, 
and  the  cities  of  Yorkshire  spoke  through  a  Wentworth  or  a  Beau- 
mont, a  Cholmeley  or  a  Fairfax.  Nor  did  the  English  gentleman, 
like  the  French  noble,  scorn  the  political  alliance  of  the  "third 
estate";  but  rather,  in  the  pursuit  of  social  estimation  among  his 
own  equals,  valued,  next  to  representing  the  yeomen  as  county 
member,  the  scarcely  inferior  honor  of  sitting  for  the  capital  of 
the  shire.  So  long  as  this  mutual  accommodation  prevailed,  the 
English  chambers  would  not  perish,  like  those  of  continental  states, 
by  the  division  of  classes. 

The  pick  of  the  country  gentlemen,  sent  by  far-distant  com- 
munities to  act  together  for  a  few  weeks  in  St.  Stephen's  Chapel, 
came  up  uncorrupted  by  previous  contact  with  Vanity  Fair. 
Except  the  lawyers  resident  at  the  Inns  of  Court,  the  members 
knew  no  more  of  London  than  that  the  merchants  were  honest 
men,  and  no  more  of  Whitehall  than  that  the  courtiers  were  false 
knaves.  The  character  and  public  spirit  of  the  Commons  under 
James  and  Charles  I  were  higher  than  in  those  subsequent  periods 
of  our  history,  when  the  Parliament  men  began  to  reside  for  a  large 
part  of  each  year  on  the  scene  of  their  more  protracted  labors, 
instituted  a  "London  Season,"  haunted  the  court,  and  aspired  to 
posts  under  the  crown. 

Until  the  Long  Parliament  the  members  had  no  thought  of 
obtaining  office.  The  edge  was  not  taken  off  their  patriotism  by 
fear  of  losing  favor  at  court,  nor  was  the  spirit  of  inquiry  smothered 
by  that  indifference  to  scandals  and  to  blunders  which  is  fostered 
by  fashionable  society  and  by  official  routine.  As  an  opposition, 
no  assembly  of  men  at  once  so  shrewd  and  so  stalwart  ever  met  to 
resist  the  abuse  of  power.  But  this  homely  ignorance  of  the  great 
world,  while  it  fortified  their  character  as  men,  limited  their  out- 
look as  politicians.  They  knew  so  little  of  the  details  of  foreign 
affairs,  of  the  cost  of  wars,  of  the  preparation  of  armaments,  that 
while  they  justly  condemned  they  were  unable  to  correct  the  haute 
politique  of  Buckingham.  Fortunately,  what  the  time  required 
of  them  was  not  an  alternative  national  policy,  but  the  protection 
of  national  liberties;  for  that  task  the  English  squires  were  fitted 
by  their  birth,  their  traditions,  and  the  freshness  of  mind  with 
which  they  came  to  each  new  Parliament  from  hunting  deer, 
interviewing  bailiffs,  and  assessing  poor-rates.  Hundreds  of  for- 


342  English   Historians 

gotten  men,  who  during  the  Parliaments  of  forty  years  succeeded 
each  other  on  the  benches  beside  Coke,  Eliot,  Wentworth,  Hyde, 
and  Pym,  brought  to  the  help  of  England  a  type  of  character  that 
never  reappeared  in  our  history,  —  directness  of  intention  and 
simplicity  of  mind,  the  inheritance  of  modest  generations  of  active 
and  hearty  rural  life ;  now  at  last  informed  by  Elizabethan  culture ; 
and  now  at  last  spiritualized  by  a  Puritan  religion. 

English  local  life  was  the  source  and  safeguard  of  English  liberty, 
which  Parliament  only  concentrated  and  expressed.  During  the 
abeyance  of  Parliamentary  opposition,  the  caprice  of  the  Tudor 
monarchs  had  been  restrained  by  the  knowledge  that  any  one  shire 
could  assert  its  cause  by  a  rebellion,  and  that,  since  no  standing 
army  existed,  such  a  rebellion  could  only  be  suppressed  if  the  other 
districts  were  in  a  temper  to  march  to  the  aid  of  the  central  gov- 
ernment. In  the  reign  of  James  I  the  House  of  Commons  again 
became  the  focus  of  local  opinions,  which  otherwise  would  never 
have  united  into  a  national  policy.  The  isolated  communities  of 
England,  divided  from  each  other  by  days  of  riding  on  steep  and 
muddy  roads,  uninformed  by  newspapers/  and  perplexed  by  strange 
tales  about  poisoners  and  papists  at  the  court,  could  only  rely,  for 
credible  information  and  sober  opinion,  on  the  men  whom  they 
sent  up  to  Parliament  to  inquire  into  these  matters  on  the  spot. 
The  Norfolk  parson,  who  distrusted  "light  scoffing  wits  not  apt 
to  deeper  search,"  records  in  his  diary  that  he  would  have  been 
"free  from  all  harder  censure "  of  the  Duke  of  Buckingham,  " but 
that  the  Parliament  did  so  oppose  him."  The  Commons,  knowing 
their  speeches  to  be  the  sole  voice  and  their  resolutions  the  sole 
instruction  of  a  politically  minded  nation,  would  not  even  com- 
promise on  the  greatest  of  the  privileges  of  Parliament,  free 
speech  within  the  walls  of  the  House.  And  very  free  speech  it 
was.  Foreigners,  accustomed  to  the  secret  intrigues  of  Paris  and 
the  silent  obedience  of  Madrid,  censured  the  boldness  but  envied 
the  impunity  of  the  Opposition,  when  some  country  gentleman, 
who  had  ridden  up  a  few  days  before  from  his  home  beyond  the 
Dorset  Downs,  rose  in  his  seat  to  abuse  the  highest  minister  of 
state,  and  was  suffered  to  walk  back  unmolested  through  the  dark- 
ening streets  to  his  lodgings  in  Holborn.  It  was  only  when  the 
session  had  ended  that  the  king  dared  to  lay  by  the  heels  a  few 
of  the  boldest  speakers. 

The  Commons  well  knew  what  had  happened  to  representative 
bodies  in  other  lands.  Foreign  ambassadors  lodged  complaints 
of  the  abuse  showered  upon  their  masters,  who  were  described  in 


The  Constitutional  Struggle  under  James  I      343 

the  House  as  "overthrowing  the  Parliaments  throughout  Christen- 
dom," and  reducing  their  subjects  by  arbitrary  taxation  to  "wear 
only  wooden  shoes  on  their  feet."  "England,"  cried  the  member 
for  Somerset,  "is  the  last  monarchy  that  yet  retains  her  liberties. 
Let  them  not  perish  now ! "  The  Commons  therefore  knew  that 
they  must  look,  not  to  the  "rights  of  nations"  or  to  any  theories 
of  government  prevalent  in  that  age,  but  to  definite  laws  and  cus- 
toms peculiar  to  England.  As  historians  they  unearthed  a  period 
in  English  history  from  the  thirteenth  to  the  fifteenth  century, 
when  Parliament  had  controlled  the  counsels  of  the  crown;  and 
as  lawyers  they  pleaded  statutes  of  the  same  period,  which  forbade 
the  encroachments  of  royal  power  in  specific  matters,  such  as  the 
imposition  of  particular  kinds  of  taxation.  Thus  an  antiquarian 
revival,  instituted  by  several  hundred  of  the  most  hard-headed  men 
in  the  country,  decided  the  future  of  our  island.  The  partisans  of 
absolutism  pleaded  the  equally  valid  Tudor  precedents,  and 
demonstrated  that  even  in  the  Middle  Ages  the  custom  of  the 
Constitution  had  by  no  means  always  followed  the  statutes,  in 
which  the  Parliaments  had  but  recorded  claims  never  heartily 
allowed  by  the  king. 

§  3.  James  I  and  Parliament 

The  theoretical  basis  and  the  legal  limits  of  Parliamentary 
privilege  and  royal  prerogative,  questions  wisely  left  to  sleep  by 
the  late  queen  and  her  loving  subjects,  occupied  the  full  attention 
of  James'  first  Parliament  which,  after  sitting  for  four  sessions  over 
a  space  of  six  years,  was  "broken"  in  1610  to  make  way  for  the 
first  long  period  of  unparliamentary  Stuart  despotism. 

The  king  was  the  first  to  open  the  high  debate.  The  light  head 
of  the  scholar  was  turned  by  the  new  wine  of  an  absolutist  theory 
of  government,  as  alien  to  the  mediaeval  English  Constitution,  as 
were  the  later  theories  of  "King  Pym"  and  "Freeborn  John 
Lilburne."  The  claim  of  the  pope  as  vicar  of  Christ  to  depose 
sovereigns  had  driven  the  champions  of  Protestant  monarchies  to 
invent  a  rival  dogma.  A  divine  right  was  asserted  to  be  inherent 
in  kings:  not  acquired,  as  the  Jesuits  taught,  by  clerical  or  by 
popular  consent,  but  by  heredity.  James,  as  divine  hereditary 
sovereign,  made  haste  to  state  his  claims  to  an  authority  that  would 
have  flattered  the  pride  of  the  Castilian  monarch. 

The  state  of  monarchy  (he  told  his  first  Parliament)  is  the  supremest 
thing  upon  earth;  for  kings  are  not  only  God's  lieutenants  upon  earth  and 
sit  upon  God's  throne,  but  even  by  God  Himself  they  are  called  Gods. 


344  English   Historians 

Hence  there  was  no  place  for  constitutional  discussion  of  a  pre- 
rogative that  had  no  limits. 

As  to  dispute  what  God  may  do  is  blasphemy,  so  it  is  sedition  in  subjects  to 
dispute  what  a  king  may  do  in  the  height  of  his  power.  I  will  not  be  content 
that  my  power  be  disputed  on. 

The  House  of  Commons,  so  he  told  its  members,  "derived  all 
matters  of  privilege  from  him";  it  sat,  not  in  its  own  right,  but 
of  his  grace. 

The  sudden  challenge  was  taken  up  at  once  and  by  the  whole 
House.  There  was  no  Royalist  party  in  St.  Stephen's  before  the 
Long  Parliament;  nor,  beyond  the  king's  own  servants,  did  any 
section  of  any  class  in  the  country  believe  in  the  theory  of  divine 
right  as  applied  by  James.  The  members  of  his  first  House  of 
Commons,  with  unanimity,  recorded  their  solemn  dissent  from  the 
royal  utterances.  When  in  the  first  session  his  Majesty  asserted 
that  Parliamentary  privilege  was  not  of  right  but  of  grace,  they 
told  him  that  he  had  been  "misinformed,"  and  when  in  the  last 
he  challenged  their  right  to  discuss  the  limits  of  his  prerogative, 
they  replied :  — 

We  hold  it  an  ancient,  general,  and  undoubted  right  of  Pailiament  to 
debate  freely  all  matters  which  properly  concern  the  subject  and  his  right 
or  state;  which  freedom  of  debate  being  once  foreclosed,  the  essence  of  the 
liberty  of  Parliament  is  withal  dissolved. 

The  new  claims  of  personal  authority  advanced  by  the  Stuarts 
were  connected  with  new  plans  for  national  efficiency.  Their  best 
servants,  Salisbury,  Bacon,  and  Strafford,  saw,  like  Richelieu, 
that  a  country  must  be  equipped  with  the  machinery  of  central- 
ized government  and  of  productive  taxation  if  she  was  to  keep  her 
place  in  the  modern  world.  James  and  Charles  I  aimed  at  union 
with  Scotland,  a  good  army,  and  a  new  system  of  finance.  In  every 
one  of  these  objects  they  were  defeated,  partly  by  their  own  lack 
of  economy  and  administrative  talent,  partly  by  the  resistance  of 
the  Commons,  who  opposed  the  strengthening  of  the  central  power 
as  dangerous  to  local  and  Parliamentary  rights.  That  danger 
would  pass  away  as  soon  as  the  central  power  became  representa- 
tive. In  the  reigns  of  William  III  and  Anne,  the  Whig  ministers 
carried  out  the  schemes  of  James  I,  —  united,  taxed,  and  armed 
Great  Britain,  and  so  enabled  her  in  the  eighteenth  century  to 
take  a  place  in  the  world's  politics  higher  than  that  of  countries 
which  had  purchased  a  brief  period  of  efficiency  by  a  lasting 
sacrifice  of  their  freedom.  , 


The  Constitutional  Struggle  under  James  I      345 

But  it  was  impossible  to  neglect  for  a  hundred  years  the  need  for 
a  more  productive  system  of  taxation,  a  problem  which,  after  the 
death  of  the  parsimonious  queen,  continually  returned  to  vex  and 
embroil  kings  with  their  Parliaments.  Elizabeth  had  waged  the 
most  serious  of  England's  wars  with  a  revenue  no  larger  than  that 
which  James  exhausted  in  time  of  peace.  At  slight  expense  to 
herself  and  her  subjects,  she  had  presided  over  a  court,  corrupt 
indeed,  but  famous  to  all  ages  for  wisdom  in  politics  and  for  ex- 
cellence in  literature;  James,  at  a  vast  charge  to  the  nation,  main- 
tained a  court  no  less  corrupt,  but  notorious  for  folly  and  lack  of 
taste.  When  the  king  realized  that  he  was  spending  at  the  rate 
of  from  £500,000  to  £600,000  a  year,  and  thereby  incurring  an 
annual  deficit  of  from  £50,000  to  £150,000,  he  was  the  more  will- 
ing to  exert  to  the  utmost  all  the  prerogative  rights  of  the  crown 
which  could  bring  in  a  revenue. 

The  regulation  of  trade  with  foreign  countries,  by  impositions 
of  duties  at  the  ports,  and  by  the  grant  or  sale  of  trading  monopo- 
lies, was  a  power  that  rested,  by  the  custom  of  the  Tudor  queens, 
not  with  Parliament,  but  with  the  crown.  It  had  hitherto  been 
regarded  rather  as  an  administrative  function  than  as  a  financial 
advantage,  but  the  increasing  volume  of  English  trade  enabled 
the  needy  James  to  find  in  it  a  source  of  large  and  independent 
revenue.  The  Book  of  Rates  which  he  issued  was  an  attempt  to 
systematize  the  import  duties  on  many  various  articles;  and  the 
commercial  and  financial  policy  involved  in  the  tariff  was  de- 
termined by  the  Privy  Council  Commissioners  of  Trade,  afterward 
turned  by  Charles  I  into  a  council  of  trade.  In  1606  the  resist- 
ance of  a  merchant  named  Bate  to  a  new  form  of  these  duties 
brought  the  whole  question  of  impositions  before  the  judges,  who 
decided  that  the  king  had  acted  within  his  legal  rights.  The 
Commons,  not  yet  aware  of  all  the  points  at  issue  between  them- 
selves and  the  crown,  paid  no  attention  to  the  matter  in  the  follow- 
ing session  of  1608;  but  in  the  two  sessions  of  1610  they  realized 
that  the  power  of  the  purse,  the  chief  safeguard  of  their  liberties, 
would  slip  from  them  as  trade  increased,  unless  this  right  to  lay 
impositions  was  at  once  challenged.  A  vigorous  controversy 
ensued.  Statutes  of  Edward  I,  clearly  prohibiting  the  levy  of 
duties  without  consent  of  Parliament,  were  quoted  in  the  House ; 
while  the  crown  lawyers  advanced  Tudor  precedent,  and  Tudor 
statutes  that  implied  the  existence  of  the  right.  The  question, 
still  undecided,  became  merged  in  all  the  other  questions  at  issue 
between  Parliament  and  king. 


346  English  Historians 

Side  by  side  with  the  controversy  over  impositions,  a  friendly 
negotiation  was  being  conducted  to  put  the  whole  financial  system 
on  a  new  footing.  The  Great  Contract,  which  Salisbury  attempted 
to  make  with  Parliament,  was  to  commute  the  antiquated  and 
vexatious  feudal  rights  of  the  crown  for  a  permanent  settlement  of 
£200,000  a  year,  which,  together  with  the  other  sources  of  income, 
should  have  met  the  annual  expenditure  of  £600,000.  Both  sides 
were  desirous  of  coming  to  such  terms  as  would  at  once  supply  the 
financial  needs  of  England,  and  put  an  end  to  the  use  of  preroga- 
tive powers  to  raise  money  without  Parliament ;  for  James  would 
on  these  terms  forego  his  right  to  impositions. 

But  at  the  last  moment  religious  and  political  misunderstanding 
prevented  financial  agreement.  As  early  as  1604  the  Commons 
had  protested  against  the  deprivation  of  their  favorite  clergy,  the 
three  hundred  silenced  Puritan  pastors.  As  the  sessions  came  and 
went,  the  complaints  on  this  head  were  strengthened  by  others, 
touching  all  points  of  the  religious  question,  —  the  imperfect  en- 
forcement of  the  penal  laws;  non-residence,  so  common  with  the 
inefficient  type  of  incumbents  favored  by  the  bishops;  and  the 
swelling  pride  shown  by  those  prelates  to  all  classes  of  men  in  their 
ecclesiastical  courts.  James,  always  in  arms  to  defend  the  epis- 
copal power,  was  still  more  indignant  to  find  his  Parliaments  seek- 
ing to  interfere  in  his  own  management  of  the  Church.  The 
Great  Contract  was  broken  off  through  mutual  suspicion,  the  dis- 
pute on  impositions  was  left  undecided,  and  finally,  in  February, 
1611,  the  Houses  were  dissolved.  The  king  determined  hence- 
forth to  carry  on  affairs  free  from  the  vexatious  cavilling  of  a 
Parliament. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Gardiner,  History  of  England,  1603-1642,  Vols.  I  and  II,  consult  table 
of  contents.  Ranke,  History  of  England,  Vol.  I,  pp.  359  ff.  Hallam,  Con- 
stitutional History  of  England,  Vol.  I,  chap.  vi.  For  documents  and  illus- 
trative materials,  consult  Prothero,  Statutes  and  Constitutional  Documents. 


CHAPTER   H 

THE  PARLIAMENTARY   CRISIS   OF   1629 

THE  constitutional  conflict  initiated  during  the  reign  of  James  I 
was  renewed  under  his  son  Charles  I.  Parliament  opposed  the 
counsellors  whom  he  chose  as  his  advisers,  resented  his  favor  to 
Catholics,  and  refused  to  grant  the  sums  he  demanded  without 
redress  of  grievances.  After  two  unsuccessful  attempts  at  secur- 
ing the  desired  grants,  Charles  resorted  to  forced  loans,  to  billet- 
ing soldiers  on  householders  without  their  consent,  and  to  other 
irritating  practices.  Still  in  need  of  money,  he  gave  way  to  his 
Parliament  in  1628  and  signed  the  Petition  of  Right.  This  con- 
cession did  not  settle  the  dispute,  however,  for  the  question  as  to 
whether  tonnage  and  poundage  could  be  levied  without  specific 
grant  led  to  further  troubles  in  Parliament  which  were  compli- 
cated by  religious  difficulties.  The  stout  resistance  of  Parliament 
induced  the  king  to  order  an  adjournment  in  March,  1629,  and 
shortly  afterward  a  dissolution.  Then  began  the  eleven  years  of 
government  without  Parliament,  which  paved  the  way  for  the 
revolution. 

§  i.   Contest  over  the  Right  of  Adjournment 1 

As  was  expected,  when  the  morning  of  March  2  came,  the 
speaker,  Sir  John  Finch,  declared  the  king's  pleasure  that  the 
House  should  be  adjourned  to  the  zoth.  He  then  put  the  formal 
question  to  which,  under  such  circumstances,  a  negative  had  never 
been  returned.  Shouts  of  "No!"  "No!"  rose  on  every  side. 
Eliot  rose,  as  if  to  speak  to  the  question  of  adjournment.  Finch 
did  his  best  to  check  him.  He  had,  he  said,  an  absolute  command 

1  Gardiner,  History  of  England,  1603-1642,  Vol.  VII,  pp.  67  S.  By  per- 
mission of  Messrs.  Longmans,  Green,  &  Company,  Publishers. 

347 


348  English  Historians 

from  his  Majesty  instantly  to  leave  the  chair  if  any  one  attempted 
to  speak. 

The  question  of  the  right  of  adjournment  thus  brought  to  an 
issue  was  not  beyond  dispute.  The  king  had  again  and  again 
directed  adjournments.  The  Lords  had  always  considered  the 
command  as  binding.  The  Commons  had  been  accustomed  to 
adjourn  themselves  in  order  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  submis- 
sion to  the  king's  authority,  though  they  had  never  refused  to 
comply  with  his  wishes. 

Eliot  had  made  up  his  mind  that  the  time  had  arrived  when  the 
House  ought  to  make  a  practical  use  of  the  right  of  self-adjourn- 
ment which  he  claimed  for  it.  As  Finch  moved  to  leave  the  chair, 
Denzil  Holies  and  Benjamin  Valentine  stepped  forward,  seized 
him  by  the  arms,  and  thrust  him  back  into  his  seat.  May  and 
Edmondes,  with  the  other  privy  councillors  present,  hurried  to  his 
assistance.  For  a  moment  he  broke  away  from  his  captors.  But 
his  triumph  was  short.  Crowds  of  members  barred  the  way,  and 
Holies  and  Valentine  seized  him  again  and  pushed  him  back  into 
his  seat.  "God's  wounds!"  cried  Holies,  "you  shall  sit  till  we 
please  to  rise."  Physical  force  was  clearly  not  on  Finch's  side, 
and  he  made  no  further  effort  to  escape. 

As  soon  as  quiet  had  been  restored  Eliot's  voice  was  heard  claim- 
ing for  the  House  the  right  to  adjourn  itself.  His  Majesty,  he 
went  on  to  say,  must  have  been  misinformed,  or  had  been  led  to 
believe  that  they  had  "trenched  too  far  upon  the  power  of  sover- 
eignty." They  had  done  nothing  unjust,  and  as  the  king  was 
just,  there  could  be  no  difference  between  them.  A  short  declara- 
tion of  their  intentions  had  been  prepared,  which  he  asked  to  be 
allowed  to  put  to  the  question. 

Eliot  spoke  from  the  highest  bench  at  the  back  of  the  House, 
and  he  threw  the  paper  forward  in  order  that  some  ene  in  front 
might  hand  it  to  the  clerk  to  be  read  even  if  the  speaker  refused 
his  consent  to  its  reading.  Shouts  of  "  Read  !"  "Read!"  were 
raised  in  the  midst  of  a  confused  struggle.  The  crowd  swayed 
backward  and  forward  around  the  chair.  In  the  midst  of  the 
excited  throng,  Coryton  struck  one  of  his  fellow  members.  The 
speaker  defended  his  rights.  He  knew  no  instance,  he  said,  in 
which  the  House  had  continued  to  transact  business  after  a  com- 
mand from  his  Majesty  to  adjourn.  "What  would  any  of  you 
do,"  he  added  plaintively,  "if  you  were  in  my  place?  Let  not 
my  desire  to  serve  you  faithfully  be  my  ruin." 

There  was  no  room  for  the  suggestion  that  the  speaker  was  not 


The  Parliamentary  Crisis  of  1629 

properly  authorized  to  order  the  adjournment.  He  had  the  com- 
mand, he  said,  from  the  king's  own  lips.  Eliot  rejoined  that  they 
were  quite  ready  to  adjourn  in  obedience  to  his  Majesty,  but  the 
declaration  must  first  be  read.  Strode  in  a  few  words  acknowledged 
the  reason  for  this  persistency.  "I  desire  the  same,"  he  said,  "that 
we  may  not  be  turned  off  like  scattered  sheep,  as  we  were  at  the 
end  of  the  last  session,  and  have  a  scorn  put  on  us  in  print,  but 
that  we  may  leave  something  behind  us."  They  wished  that  their 
voice  should  be  heard  as  a  rallying  cry  to  the  nation  in  the  con- 
flict which  had  begun. 

One  after  another  rose  to  urge  upon  the  speaker  the  duty  of 
obeying  the  order  of  the  House.  The  order  of  the  House,  said 
Eliot,  would  be  sufficient  to  excuse  him  with  the  king.  If  he  re- 
fused obedience,  he  should  be  called  to  the  bar. 

At  this  intimation  of  defiance  of  the  king's  command,  some 
members  rose  to  leave  the  House.  Orders  were  at  once  given  to 
the  sergeant-at-arms  to  shut  the  door,  that  no  tales  might  be  car- 
ried to  those  who  were  outside.  The  sergeant-at-arms  hesitated 
to  obey,  and  Sir  Miles  Hobart,  at  his  own  suggestion,  was  directed 
to  close  the  doors.  He  swiftly  turned  the  lock  and  put  the  key  in 
his  pocket. 

As  soon  as  order  was  restored,  Finch's  voice  was  heard  once 
more.  To  be  called  to  the  bar,  he  said,  was  one  of  the  greatest 
miseries  which  could  befall  him.  Then,  after  a  few  words  from 
others,  he  begged  to  be  allowed  to  go  to  the  king,  as  in  the  last 
session.  He  had  done  them  no  ill-offices  then,  and  he  would  do 
them  none  now.  "If  I  do  not  return,  and  that  speedily,"  he 
ended  by  saying,  "tear  me  in  pieces." 

Cries  of  "Ay!"  and  "No!"  showed  that  there  was  a  division 
of  opinion.  Eliot  again  threatened  the  speaker  with  the  conse- 
quences of  persisting  in  his  refusal.  No  man,  he  said,  had  ever 
been  blasted  in  that  House,  "but  a  curse  at  length  fell  upon  him." 
He  asked  that  his  paper  might  be  returned  to  him.  He  would 
read  it  himself,  that  the  House  and  the  world  might  know  the 
loyalty  of  the  affections  of  those  who  had  prepared  it.  Before 
the  paper  was  returned,  Strode  made  one  more  effort  to  have  the 
question  regularly  put.  "You  have  protested  yourself,"  he  said 
to  the  speaker,  "  to  be  our  servant,  but  if  you  do  not  what  we  com- 
mand you,  that  protestation  of  yours  is  but  a  compliment.  The 
Scripture  saith,  'His  servants  ye  are  whom  ye  obey.'  If  you  will 
not  obey  us,  you  are  not  our  servant." 

Finch's  position  was  indeed  a  hard  one.     Elected  by  the  Com- 


350  English  Historians 

mons,  but  with  a  tacit  regard  to  a  previous  selection  by  the  king, 
the  speaker  had  hitherto  served  as  a  link  between  the  crown  and 
the  House  over  which  he  presided.  In  Elizabeth's  days  it  had 
been  easy  for  a  speaker  to  serve  two  masters.  It  was  no  longer 
possible  now.  The  strain  of  the  breaking  constitution  fell  upon 
him.  "I  am  not  the  less  the  king's  servant,"  he  said,  piteously, 
"  for  being  yours.  I  will  not  say  I  will  not  put  the  reading  of  the 
paper  to  the  question,  but  I  must  say,  I  dare  not." 

§  2.   Eliot's  Denunciatory  Speech 

Upon  this  final  refusal  Eliot  raised  his  voice.  He  told  his 
hearers,  silent  enough  now,  how  religion  had  been  attacked ;  how 
Arminianism  was  the  pioneer  to  popery ;  how  there  was  a  power 
above  the  law  which  checked  the  magistrates  in  the  execution  of 
justice.  Those  who  exercised  this  power  had  been  the  authors 
of  the  interruptions  in  this  place,  whose  guilt  and  fear  of  punish- 
ment had  cast  the  House  upon  the  rocks.  Amongst  these  evil 
councillors  were  some  prelates  of  the  Church,  such  as  in  all  ages 
have  been  ready  for  innovation  and  disturbance,  though  at  this 
time  more  than  any.  Them  he  denounced  as  enemies  to  his 
Majesty.  And  behind  them  stood  another  figure  more  base  and 
sinister  still.  The  lord  treasurer  (Weston)  himself  was  the  prime 
agent  of  iniquity.  "I  fear,"  continued  Eliot,  "in  his  person  is 
contracted  the  very  root  and  principle  of  these  evils.  I  find  him 
building  upon  the  old  grounds  and  foundations  which  were  built 
by  the  Duke  of  Buckingham,  his  great  master.  His  counsels,  I 
am  doubtful,  begat  the  sad  issue  of  the  last  session,  and  from  this 
cause  that  unhappy  conclusion  came."  Not  only  was  Weston 
"the  head  of  all  the  papists,"  and  the  root  of  all  the  dangers  to 
which  religion  was  exposed,  but  the  course  which  he  had  taken  in 
the  question  of  tonnage  and  poundage  had  been  adopted  from 
a  deliberate  design  of  subverting  the  trade  of  the  country',  and  in 
the  end  of  subverting  the  government.  When  commerce  had  been 
ruined,  and  the  wooden  walls  of  England  were  no  longer  in  exist- 
ence, the  state  would  be  at  the  mercy  of  its  neighbors.  "These 
things,"  cried  Eliot,  "would  have  been  made  more  apparent  if 
time  had  been  for  it,  and  I  hope  to  have  time  to  do  it  yet." 

Once  more  Eliot's  lightly  kindled  imagination  had  played  him 
false.  The  charge  of  deliberate  treason  was  as  unfounded  as  it 
was  improbable.  In  the  wild  excitement  of  that  day  everything 
seemed  credible  to  him,  and  the  proud  confidence  of  his  bearing 


The  Parliamentary  Crisis  of  1629 

stamped  upon  his  listening  auditors  the  firm  assurance  that  he 
was  not  dealing  his  shafts  at  random.  At  last,  turning  to  the 
paper  which  he  held  in  his  hand,  he  briefly  explained  its  meaning. 
"There  is  in  this  paper,"  he  said,  "a  protestation  against  those 
persons  that  are  innovators  in  religion,  against  those  that  are 
introducers  of  any  new  customs,  and  a  protestation  against  those 
that  shall  execute  such  commands  for  tonnage  and  poundage, 
and  a  protestation  against  merchants  that,  if  any  merchant  shall 
pay  any  such  duties,  he  as  all  the  rest  shall  be  as  capital  enemies 
of  the  state,  and  whensoever  we  shall  sit  here  again,  if  I  be  here  — 
as  I  think  I  shall  —  I  will  deliver  myself  more  at  large,  and  fall 
upon  the  person  of  that  man." 

Eliot  had  made  known  what  the  contents  of  the  paper  were; 
but  unless  his  resolutions  could  be  formally  put  by  the  speaker, 
they  would  not  go  forth  as  more  than  the  expression  of  his  private 
opinion.  Coryton  urged  that  it  would  be  for  the  king's  advantage 
that  the  paper  should  be  read.  He  had  need  of  help  from  the 
House,  and  those  persons  that  had  been  named  kept  it  from  him. 
The  members  had  come  there  with  a  full  resolution  to  grant  not 
merely  tonnage  and  poundage,  but  all  other  necessary  supplies  as 
well.  Shouts  of  "All!"  "All!"  encouraged  Coryton  to  proceed. 
"Shall  every  man,"  he  said,  "that  hath  broken  the  law  have  the 
liberty  to  pretend  the  king's  commands?"  -Ought  that  transcen- 
dent court,  highest  of  all  others,  to  permit  the  laws  to  be  broken  ? 
"Therefore,"  he  ended,  "I  shall  move  that  his  Majesty  may  be 
moved  from  this  House  to  advise  with  his  grave  and  learned 
council ,  and  to  leave  out  those  that  have  been  here  noted  to  be  ill 
councillors  both  for  the  king  and  kingdom." 

There  was  one  in  that  assembly  whose  ears  tingled  with  shame 
and  indignation.  Jerome  Weston,  the  lord  treasurer's  eldest 
son,  stood  up  to  defend  his  father.  "We  have  here  in  considera- 
tion," he  said,  "human  laws  which,  as  they  be  many,  so  there  is 
one  eternal  law  of  God,  that  we  should  love  our  neighbors  as  our- 
selves. Now,  what  can  be  more  unjust  than,  without  true  grounds, 
to  lay  aspersions  upon  a  noble  person  ?  Would  any  of  us  think  it 
just  to  be  done  to  ourselves?  Let  not  the  lord  treasurer  be  pre- 
judged. He  has  as  faithful  a  heart  to  Church  and  commonwealth 
as  any  man  sitting  here." 

Then,  as  now,  the  House  of  Commons  was  wisely  tolerant  of 
divergence  of  opinion,  especially  when  it  was  prompted  by  do- 
mestic affection.  Even  in  that  supreme  hour  of  conflict  the  call 
was  not  altogether  without  effect.  The  reckless  Clement  Coke, 


352  English  Historians 

indeed,  struck  the  blow  home.  "Whoever,"  he  said,  "laid  ton- 
nage and  poundage  on  the  people  without  the  gift  of  Parliament 
is  an  enemy,  to  the  commonwealth,  and  that  this  great  person  has 
done  this,  there  are  not  light  suspicions  only  upon  him,  but  ap- 
parent proofs."  But  Eliot  was  not  so  entirely  thrown  off  his 
balance  as  to  assume  guilt  which  had  not  been  proved.  He  had 
no  intention,  he  declared,  of  asking  the  House  to  take  his  asser- 
tions as  evidence.  He  hoped  to  be  allowed  to  produce  his  proofs 
when  they  met  again. 

§  3.   The  Passage  of  the  Resolution 

The  discussion  threatened  to  become  endless  for  want  of  definite 
aim.  Selden  brought  it  back  to  the  original  issue  by  telling  the 
speaker  once  more  that  he  was  bound  to  put  the  question.  If  he 
refused,  they  had  in  him  a  master  instead  of  a  servant.  He  would 
virtually  abdicate  his  office,  and  they  ought  then  to  proceed  to  the 
choice  of  another  speaker.  For  the  present  Selden  contented 
himself  with  moving  that  Eliot  should  take  the  chair  and  put  the 
resolutions  to  the  House. 

An  unexpected  obstacle  arose.  Eliot  having,  as  it  would  seem, 
despaired  of  obtaining  a  formal  vote  upon  his  resolutions,  had 
thrown  the  paper  in  the  fire.  "I  think,"  said  Holies,  reasonably 
enough,  "that  gentleman  hath  done  very  ill  to  burn  that  paper." 
Eliot  gracefully  submitted  to  the  correction.  "I  give  that  gentle- 
man great  thanks  for  reproving  me  for  the  burning  of  that  paper, 
and  of  all  obligations  that  have  passed  between  us  I  hold  this 
for  the  greatest."  With  the  exception  of  a  formal  motion  made 
shortly  afterward,  these  words  of  courtesy  were  the  last  utterance 
of  the  high-souled  man  within  the  walls  of  the  House  of  Commons. 

Whatever  was  to  be  done  must  be  done  speedily.  As  Holies 
rose,  a  knocking  was  heard  at  the  door.  The  king  had  sent  for 
the  sergeant  to  bring  away  the  mace.  The  House  would  not  yet 
part  with  the  symbol  of  authority;  but  after  some  delay,  the 
sergeant  was  allowed  to  go.  Hobart  let  him  out,  and  locked  the 
door  after  him  again. 

As  soon  as  order  was  restored,  there  was  a  fresh  discussion  on 
the  propriety  of  naming  the  lord  treasurer.  Sir  Peter  Heyman 
turned  once  more  upon  Finch:  "I  am  sorry,"  he  said,  "that  you 
must  be  made  an  instrument  to  cut  up  the  liberties  of  the  subject 
by  the  roots.  I  am  sorry  you  are  a  Kentish  man,  and  that  you 
are  of  that  name  which  hath  borne  some  good  reputation  in  our 


The  Parliamentary  Crisis  of  1629 

country.  The  speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons  is  our  mouth, 
and  if  our  mouth  will  be  sullen  and  will  not  speak  when  we  would 
have  it,  it  should  be  bitten  by  the  teeth,  and  ought  to  be  made  an 
example;  and,  for  my  part,  I  think  it  not  fit  you  should  escape 
without  some  mark  of  punishment  to  be  set  upon  you  by  the 
House." 

It  was  easier  to  speak  of  punishment  than  to  inflict  it.  Max- 
well, the  usher  of  the  Black  Rod,  was  now  knocking  at  the  door 
with  a  message  from  the  king.  The  moments  were  fast  flying, 
and  there  was  no  time  for  longer  deliberation.  Charles  had  sent 
for  his  guard  to  force  a  way  into  the  House.  Not  a  minute  was 
to  be  lost  in  idle  recrimination.  Holies  threw  himself  into  the 
breach.  "Since  that  paper  is  burnt,"  he  said,  "I  conceive  I 
cannot  do  his  Majesty  nor  my  country  better  service  than  to 
deliver  to  this  House  what  was  contained  in  it,  which,  as  I  remem- 
ber, was  thus  much  in  effect :  — 

"Whosoever  shall  bring  in  innovation  in  religion,  or  by  favor 
seek  to  extend  or  introduce  popery  or  Arminianism,  or  other 
opinions  disagreeing  from  the  true  and  orthodox  Church,  shall  be 
reputed  a  capital  enemy  to  this  kingdom  and  the  commonwealth. 

"Whosoever  shall  counsel  or  advise  the  taking  and  levying  of 
the  subsidies  of  tonnage  and  poundage,  not  being  granted  by  Par- 
liament, or  shall  be  an  actor  or  an  instrument  therein,  shall  be 
likewise  reputed  an  innovator  in  the  government,  and  a  capital 
enemy  to  this  kingdom  and  commonwealth. 

"If  any  merchant  or  other  person  whatsoever  shall  voluntarily 
yield  cr  pay  the  said  subsidies  of  tonnage  and  poundage,  not  being 
granted  by  Parliament,  he  shall  likewise  be  reputed  a  betrayer  of 
the  liberty  of  England,  and  an  enemy  to  the  same." 

It  was  hopeless  to  apply  again  to  speaker  or  clerk.  Holies  put 
the  question  himself.  Hearty  shouts  of  "  Ay  !"  "Ay  ["adopted 
the  defiance  which  he  flung  in  the  face  of  the  king.  The  House 
then  voted  its  own  adjournment.  The  door  was  thrown  open  at 
last,  and  the  members  poured  forth  to  convey  to  the  outer  world 
the  tidings  of  their  high  resolve.  Eleven  years  were  to  pass  away 
before  the  representatives  of  the  country  were  permitted  to*  cross 
that  threshold  again.  .  .  . 

Immediately  after  the  adjournment  a  proclamation  for  the 
dissolution  of  Parliament  was  drawn  up  and  signed  by  the  king. 
Charles  threw  the  whole  blame  upon  the  insolence  of  those  who 
had  resisted  his  command  to  adjourn.  Yet  it  was  not  without 
hesitation  that  the  decisive  step  was  taken.  Coventry  was  sup- 


354  English  Historians 

ported  by  a  considerable  following  in  the  council  in  asking  that 
a  milder  course  should  be  adopted.  Weston,  whose  impeach- 
ment had  been  called  for  by  Eliot,  argued  strongly  on  the  other 
side.  For  two  days  the  contending  parties  strove  with  one 
another,  and  it  was  only  on  the  4th  that  the  Proclamation  was  made 
public.  The  day  before,  Eliot  and  eight  other  members  of  the 
Commons  had  been  summoned  to  appear  before  the  board. 
Seven  of  them  presented  themselves  before  the  council,  and  were 
committed  either  to  the  Tower  or  to  other  prisons.  The  other 
two  were  subsequently  captured,  and  shared  the  fate  of  their 
friends. 


CHAPTER   III 

ARCHBISHOP   LAUD   AND   THE  RELIGIOUS  CONTROVERSY 

DURING  the  period  of  personal  government,  Charles  I  did  many 
things  which  irritated  the  people  of  England.  He  fined  men  who, 
though  holding  by  military  tenure  lands  worth  £40  a  year,  had  not 
been  knighted,  thus  reviving  a  practice  which  men  believed  to  be 
obsolete.  He  levied  ship  money  to  build  up  his  navy,  and  to 
replenish  his  treasury  resorted  to  many  other  schemes  which 
stirred  up  a  bitter  opposition  from  those  on  whom  the  burdens 
fell.  To  these  sources  of  discontent  another  was  added  in  the 
appointment  of  Laud  as  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  In  his  own 
words,  Laud  "labored  nothing  more  than  that  the  external  pub- 
lic worship  of  God,  too  much  slighted  in  most  parts  of  the  king- 
dom —  might  be  preserved,  and  that  with  as  much  decency  and 
uniformity  as  might  be."  Here  were  an  ideal  and  a  determination 
clearly  athwart  the  temper  of  the  growing  Puritan  party.  The 
student,  therefore,  seeking  the  forces  at  work  in  the  constitutional 
struggle  must  closely  examine  the  policy  and  actions  of  Arch- 
bishop Laud. 

§  i.    The  Character  of  Archbishop  Laud1 

Soberness  of  judgment  in  matters  of  doctrine,  combined  with 
an  undue  reverence  for  external  forms,  an  entire  want  of  imagina- 
tive sympathy,  and  a  quick  and  irritable  temper,  made  Laud  one 
of  the  worst  rulers  who  could  at  this  crisis  have  been  imposed  upon 
the  English  Church.  For  it  was  a  time  when,  in  the  midst  of 
diverging  tendencies  of  thought,  many  things  were  certain  to  be 
said  and  done  which  would  appear  extravagant  to  his  mind;  and 

1  Gardiner,  History  of  England,  1603-1642,  Vol.  VII,  pp.  301  ff.  By 
permission  of  Longmans,  Green.  &  Company,  Publishers. 

355 


356  English   Historians 

when  the  bond  of  unity  which  he  sought  to  preserve  was  to  be 
found  rather  in  identity  of  moral  aim  than  in  exact  conformity 
with  any  special  standard.  The  remedy  for  the  diseases  of  the 
time,  in  short,  was  to  besought  in  liberty,  and  of  the  value  of  liberty 
Laud  was  as  ignorant  as  the  narrowest  Puritan  or  the  most  bigoted 
Roman  Catholic. 

Those  who  are  most  prone  to  misunderstand  others  are  them- 
selves most  liable  to  be  misunderstood.  The  foreign  ecclesiastic, 
if  such  he  was,  who  offered  Laud  a  cardinal's  hat,  did  not  stand 
alone  in  his  interpretation  of  the  tendencies  of  the  new  archbishop. 
One  Ludowick  Bowyer,  a  young  man  of  good  family,  who  may 
have  been  mad,  and  was  certainly  a  thief  and  a  swindler,  went 
about  spreading  rumors  that  Laud  had  been  detected  in  raising 
a  revenue  for  the  pope,  and  had  been  sent  to  the  Tower  as  a  traitor. 
The  Star  Chamber  imprisoned  him  for  life,  fined  him  £3000,  or- 
dered him  to  be  set  three  times  in  the  pillory,  to  lose  his  ears,  and 
to  be  branded  on  the  forehead  with  the  letters  L  and  R,  as  a  liar 
and  a  rogue.  "His  censure  is  upon  record,"  wrote  Laud  coolly 
in  his  diary,  "and  God  forgive  him.  ..." 

The  sharpness  and  irritability  with  which  Laud  was  commonly 
charged  were  not  inconsistent  with  a  readiness  to  use  persuasion 
rather  than  force  as  long  as  mildness  promised  a  more  successful 
issue.  When  once  he  discovered  that  an  opponent  was  not  to  be 
gained  over,  he  lost  all  patience  with  him.  He  had  no  sense  of 
humor  to  qualify  the  harshness  of  his  judgment.  Small  offences 
assumed  in  his  eyes  the  character  of  great  crimes.  If  in  the  Star 
Chamber,  any  voice  was  raised  for  a  penalty  out  of  all  proportion 
to  the  magnitude  of  the  fault,  that  voice  was  sure  to  be  the  arch- 
bishop's. 

2.   Laud  and  Ecclesiastical  Discipline 

Almost  immediately  after  his  promotion  Laud  received  a  letter 
from  the  king  which  was  doubtless  written  at  his  own  instigation. 
In  this  letter  he  was  directed  to  see  that  the  bishops  observed  the 
canon  which  restricted  their  ordinations  to  persons  who,  unless 
they  held  certain  exceptional  positions,  were  able  to  show  that 
they  were  about  to  undertake  the  cure  of  souls.  In  this  way  the 
door  of  the  ministry  would  be  barred  against  two  classes  of  men 
which  were  regarded  by  the  archbishop  with  an  evil  eye,  and  at 
which  he  had  already  struck  in  the  king's  instructions  issued  four 
years  before.  No  man  would  now  be  able  to  take  orders  with  the 
intention  of  passing  his  life  as  a  lecturer,  in  the  hope  that  he  would 


Archbishop  Laud  and  the  Religious  Controversy    357 

thus  escape  the  obligation  of  using  the  whole  of  the  services  in  the 
Prayer  Book.  Nor  would  any  man  be  able  to  take  orders  with 
the  hope  of  obtaining  a  chaplaincy  in  a  private  family,  where  he 
would  be  bound  to  no  restrictions  except  those  which  his  patron 
was  pleased  to  lay  upon  him.  Only  peers  and  other  persons  of 
high  rank  were  now  to  be  permitted  to  keep  chaplains  at  all. 

Undoubtedly  the  system  thus  attacked  was  an  evil  system. 
The  separation  between  the  lecturer  who  preached  and  the  con- 
forming minister  who  read  the  service  was  admirably  contrived 
to  raise  feelings  of  partisanship  in  a  congregation  and  a  division 
amongst  the  clergy  themselves.  The  lecturer  who  sat  in  the  vestry 
till  the  prayers  were  over,  and  then  mounted  the  pulpit  as  a  being 
infinitely  superior  to  the  mere  reader  of  prayers  who  had  preceded 
him,  was  not  very  likely  to  promote  the  peace  of  the  Church.  The 
system  of  chaplaincies  was  fraught  with  evils  of  another  kind. 
The  chaplain  of  a  wealthy  patron  might  indeed  be  admitted  as 
the  honored  friend  of  the  house,  the  counsellor  in  spiritual  diffi- 
culties, the  guide  and  companion  of  the  younger  members  of  the 
family;  but  in  too  many  instances  the  clergyman  who  accepted 
such  a  position  would  sink  into  the  dependent  hanger-on  of  a 
rich  master,  expected  to  flatter  his  virtues  and  to.  be  very  lenient 
to  his  faults,  to  do  his  errands  and  to  be  the  butt  of  his  jests. 
Promoters  of  ecclesiastical  discipline  like  Laud,  and  dramatic 
writers  who  cared  nothing  for  ecclesiastical  discipline  at  all,  were 
of  one  mind  in  condemning  a  system  which  brought  the  ministers 
of  the  gospel  into  a  position  in  which  they  might  easily  be  treated 
with  less  consideration  than  a  groom.  .  .  . 

Laud's  intense  concentration  upon  the  immediate  present 
hindered  him  from  perceiving  the  ultimate  consequence  of  his 
acts.  His  strong  confidence  in  the  power  of  external  discipline 
to  subdue  the  most  reluctant  minds  encouraged  him  to  seize  the 
happy  moment  when  the  king,  and,  as  he  firmly  believed,  the  law, 
was  on  his  side.  Deeper  questions  about  the  suitability  of  that 
law  to  human  nature  in  general  or  to  English  nature  in  particular 
he  passed  over  as  irrelevant.  He  did  not  look  to  the  king  to  carry 
out  some  ideal  which  the  law  knew  nothing  of.  He  had  "ever 
been  of  opinion  that  the  king  and  his  people"  were  "so  joined 
together  in  one  civil  and  politic  body,  as  that  it"  was  "not  possible 
for  any  man  to  be  true  to  the  king  that  shall  be  found  treacherous 
to  the  State  established  by  law,  and  work  to  the  subversion  of  the 
people."  In  his  eyes,  no  doubt  the  king  possessed  legal  powers 
which  the  mediaeval  churchman  would  have  regarded  as  tyrannical 


358  English  Historians 

usurpation.  As  the  king  administered  justice  by  his  judges,  and 
announced  his  political  resolutions  by  his  privy  council,  so  he 
exercised  his  ecclesiastical  authority  through  his  bishops  or  his 
Court  of  High  Commission.  Though  the  bishops  might  give  him 
advice  which  he  would  not  find  elsewhere,  and  though  they  might 
owe  their  power  to  act  to  a  special  divine  appointment,  yet  all 
their  jurisdiction  came  from  the  sovereign,  as  clearly  as  the  juris- 
diction of  the  King's  Bench  and  the  Exchequer  came  from  him. 
Hence  Laud  cared  as  little  for  the  spiritual  independence  of  bishops 
as  he  cared  for  the  spiritual  independence  of  congregations.  His 
counterpart  in  our  own  times  is  to  be  found,  not  in  the  ecclesiastics 
who  magnify  the  authority  of  the  Church,  but  in  the  lawyers  who, 
substituting  the  supremacy  of  the  House  of  Commons  for  the 
supremacy  of  the  crown,  strive  in  vain  to  reply  to  all  spiritual  and 
moral  questionings  by  the  simple  recommendation  to  obey  the 
law. 

§  3.   Laud  and  Ecclesiastical  Architecture 

Laud  understood  far  better  how  to  deal  with  buildings  than  with 
men.  The  repairs  at  St.  Paul's  were  being  carried  briskly  on 
under  the  superintendence  of  Inigo  Jones.  During  the  remainder 
of  Laud's  time  of  power  from  £9000  to  £15,000  a  year  were  de- 
voted to  the  work,  arising  partly  from  contributions  more  or  less 
of  a  voluntary  nature,  partly  from  fines  imposed  by  the  High  Com- 
mission which  were  set  aside  for  the  purpose.  Much  to  the  king's 
annoyance,  rumors  were  spread  that  the  greater  part  of  this  money 
was  not  applied  to  the  building  at  all,  but  went  to  swell  the  failing 
revenues  of  the  crown.  The  restoration  of  the  external  fabric 
drew  attention  to  an  abuse  of  long  standing.  The  nave  and  aisles 
had,  from  times  beyond  the  memory  of  men  then  living,  been 
used  as  places  of  public  resort.  Porters  carried  their  burdens 
across  the  church  as  in  the  open  street.  Paul's  Walk,  as  the  long 
central  aisle  was  called,  was  the  rendezvous  of  the  men  of  business 
who  had  a  bargain  to  drive,  and  of  the  loungers  whose  highest 
wish  was  to  while  away  an  idle  hour  in  agreeable  society.  To  the 
men  of  the  reigns  of  James  I  and  Charles  I  it  was  all  that  the 
coffee-houses  became  to  the  men  of  the  reign  of  Charles  II  and 
James  II,  and  all  that  the  clubhouses  are  to  the  men  of  the  reign 
of  Victoria.  There  were  to  be  heard  the  latest  rumors  of  the  day. 
There  men  told  how  some  fresh  victory'  had  been  achieved  by 
Gustavus,  or  whispered  how  Laud  had  sold  himself  to  the  pope, 
and  how  Portland  had  sold  himself  to  the  king  of  Spain.  There, 


Archbishop  Laud  and  the  Religious  Controversy    359 

too,  was  to  be  heard  the  latest  scandal  affecting  the  credit  of  some 
merchant  of  repute  or  the  good  name  of  some  lady  of  title.  When 
the  gay  world  had  moved  away,  children  took  the  place  of  their 
elders,  making  the  old  arches  ring  with  their  merry  laughter. 
The  clergy  within  the  choir  complained  that  their  voices  were 
drowned  by  the  uproar,  and  that  neither  prayers  nor  sermon 
reached  the  ears  of  the  congregation. 

With  this  misuse  of  the  cathedral  church  of  the  capital,  Charles, 
not  a  moment  too  soon,  resolved  to  interfere.  He  issued  orders 
that  no  one  should  walk  in  the  nave  in  time  of  service,  that  bur- 
dens should  not  be  carried  in  the  church  at  all,  and  that  the 
children  must  look  elsewhere  for  a  playground.  In  order  to  meet 
the  wants  of  the  loungers  excluded  from  their  accustomed  resort, 
he  devoted  £500  a  year  to  the  building  of  a  portico  at  the  west 
end  for  their  use.  The  straight  lines  of  the  Grecian  architecture 
of  the  portico  contrasted  strangely  with  the  Gothic  traceries 
above.  It  reminds  us,  as  we  see  it  in  the  old  prints,  of  the  dead- 
ness  of  feeling  with  which  even  a  great  artist,  such  as  Inigo  Jones, 
regarded  the  marvels  of  mediaeval  architecture ;  it  may  also  bring 
before  us  the  memory  of  one  instance  in  which  Charles  thought 
it  necessary  to  conciliate  opposition. 

In  his  care  for  St.  Paul's,  Laud  was  not  likely  to  neglect  his  own 
chapel  at  Lambeth.  Abbott  had  left  it  in  much  disorder.  Frag- 
ments of  painted  glass  were  mingled  confusedly  with  white  spaces 
in  the  windows.  The  painted  glass  was  now  restored  to  the  con- 
dition in  which  it  had  originally  been  when  placed  there  by  Arch- 
bishop Morton.  It  contained  scenes  from  the  Old  and  New 
Testament;  a  representation  of  the  Saviour  hanging  upon  the 
cross  —  a  crucifix  as  the  Puritans  termed  it  —  occupying  the  east 
end.  When  the  windows  were  completed,  the  communion  table 
was  moved  to  the  eastern  wall.  Toward  this  the  archbishop 
and  his  chaplains  bowed  whenever  they  entered.  There  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  any  thing  gorgeous  or  pompous  in  the 
ceremonial  observed,  which  would  have  distinguished  it  from 
that  which  is  to  be  seen  in  almost  every  parish  church  in  England 
at  the  present  day.  .  .  . 

§  4.    The  Puritan  Sabbath 

If  Laud  was  intolerant  whenever  Church  order  and  discipline 
were  concerned,  the  Puritans  whom  he  combated  were  no  less 
intolerant  when  they  believed  that  the  interests  of  morality  were 


360  English  Historians 

concerned.  No  greater  contrast  can  be  drawn  than  between  the 
Puritan  Sabbath  and  the  traditional  Sunday  of  the  Middle  Ages. 
The  Puritan,  however,  was  not  content  with  passing  the  day  in 
meditation  or  self-examination,  unless  he  could  compel  others  to 
abandon  not  merely  riotous  and  disorderly  amusements,  but  even 
those  forms  of  recreation  to  which  they  and  their  fathers  had  been 
accustomed  from  time  immemorial.  The  precepts  of  the  Fourth 
Commandment  were,  according  to  his  interpretation,  of  perpetual 
obligation.  The  Christian  Lord's  Day  was  but  the  Jewish  Sab- 
bath, and  it  was  the  duty  of  Christian  magistrates  to  enforce  its 
strict  observance.  The  opponents  of  Puritanism  took  a  precisely 
opposite  view.  The  institution  of  the  Christian  Sunday,  they 
argued,  had  been  handed  down  simply  by  the  oldest  Church  tra- 
dition, and  it  was  therefore  for  the  Church  to  say  in  what  manner 
it  should  be  observed.  Nor  could  the  Church,  as  a  loving  mother, 
forget  that  the  mass  of  her  children  were  hardly  worked  during 
six  days  of  the  week,  and  that  it  would  be  cruelty  to  deprive  them 
of  that  relaxation  which  they  had  hitherto  enjoyed. 

The  question  assumed  a  practical  shape  through  a  dispute  which 
had  recently  arisen  in  Somerset.  It  had  long  been  a  custom  in 
that  and  in  the  neighboring  counties  to  hold  feasts  under  the  name 
of  wakes  on  the  day  of  the  saint  to  whom  the  parish  church  was 
dedicated.  In  the  sixteenth  century  these  wakes  were,  for  the 
most  part,  transferred  to  the  preceding  or  the  following  Sunday. 
Such  convivial  gatherings  always  afforded  a  temptation  to  coarse 
and  unrefined  natures,  and  the  wakes  not  infrequently  ended  in 
drunkenness  and  the  indulgence  of  the  lower  passions.  In  the 
days  of  Queen  Elizabeth  the  judges  of  assize  and  the  justices  of 
the  peace  had  forbidden  them  as  unlawful  meetings  for  tippling. 
In  1615  two  manslaughters  having  been  committed  at  one  of  these 
festivals,  a  more  stringent  order  was  issued,  in  which  "the  con- 
tinual profanation  of  God's  Sabbath"  was  for  the  first  time  men- 
tioned. In  1627  the  judges  directed  that  this  order  should  be 
yearly  published  by  every  minister  in  his  parish  church,  and  a 
return  made  of  those  who  had  rendered  obedience  to  this  com- 
mand. In  1632  these  directions  were  re-issued  by  Chief  Justice 
Richardson. 

Others  besides  the  Puritans  of  the  county  gave  their  support  to 
Richardson.  Lord  Poulett,  who  had  thrown  all  his  influence  on 
the  side  of  the  crown  in  the  days  of  Buckingham,  headed  a  petition 
against  the  wakes.  On  the  other  hand,  Sir  Robert  Phelips,  who 
had  been  drawing  nearer  to  the  court  ever  since  the  disturbance  at 


Archbishop  Laud  and  the  Religious  Controversy    361 

the  end  of  the  last  session,  complained  to  Laud,  and  Laud  com- 
plained to  the  king,  of  the  conduct  of  the  judges. 

Laud  was  especially  indignant  at  the  presumption  of  the  judges 
in  directing  the  clergy  to  read  their  orders  in  church,  which  he 
regarded  as  an  interference  with  the  jurisdiction  of  the  bishop. 
The  king  approved  of  his  objection,  and  sent  a  message  to  Richard- 
son requiring  him  to  revoke  the  order  at  the  next  Lent  assizes. 
Richardson  took  no  notice  of  the  message.  Before  the  summer 
assizes  Charles  repeated  his  directions  in  person.  The  judge  did 
not  any  longer  venture  to  refuse  obedience,  but  he  took  care  to 
show  that  he  was  acting  under  compulsion. 

Charles  lost  patience.  Richardson  was  summoned  before  a 
committee  of  the  council.  Laud  rated  him  soundly  for  his  dis- 
obedience. He  left  the  room  with  tears  in  his  eyes.  "I  have  been 
almost  choked,"  he  said,  "with  a  pair  of  lawn  sleeves."  He  was 
forbidden  ever  to  ride  the  western  circuit  again. 

Laud  had  already  written  to  Pierce,  the  new  bishop  of  the 
diocese,  requesting  him  to  ask  the  opinion  of  some  ministers  in 
the  county.  The  bishop's  report  was  doubtless  too  highly  col- 
ored. The  seventy-two  ministers  to  whom  he  directed  his  ques- 
tions were  probably  not  selected  at  random,  and  they  must  have 
known  what  sort  of  answer  would  be  acceptable  to  their  ecclesi- 
astical superiors;  still  it  is  difficult  to  set  aside  their  evidence 
altogether.  Friendships,  they  said,  were  cemented,  and  old  quar- 
rels made  up  at  these  gatherings.  The  churches  were  better  fre- 
quented than  on  any  other  Sunday  in  the  year.  "I  also  find," 
added  Pierce,  "that  the  people  generally  would  by  no  means  have 
these  leasts  taken  away ;  for  when  the  constables  of  some  parishes 
came  from  the  assizes  about  two  years  ago,  and  told  their  neigh- 
bors that  the  judges  would  put  down  these  feasts,  they  answered 
that  it  was  very  hard  if  they  could  not  entertain  their  kindred  and 
friends  once  a  year  to  praise  God  for  his  blessings,  and  to  pray  for 
the  king's  Majesty,  under  whose  happy  government  they  enjoyed 
peace  and  quietness,  and  they  said  they  would  endure  the  judge's 
penalties  rather  than  they  would  break  off  their  feast  days.  It  is 
found  also  true  by  experience  that  many  suits  in  law  have  been 
taken  up  at  these  feasts  by  mediation  of  friends,  which  could  not 
have  been  so  soon  ended  in  Westminster  Hall." 

The  bishop  then  pointed  out  what  he  considered  to  be  the  real 
motive  for  the  objection  taken.  The  precise  sort,  he  said,  dis- 
liked the  feasts  because  they  were  held  upon  Sundays,  "which 
they  never  call  but  Sabbath  days,  upon  which  they  would  have  no 


362  English  Historians 

manner  of  recreation."  Some  of  the  ministers  whom  he  had  con- 
sulted were  of  the  contrary  opinion.  They  thought  that  "if  the 
people  should  not  have  their  honest  and  lawful  recreations  upon 
Sundays  after  evening  prayer,  they  would  go  either  into  tippling- 
houses,  and  there  upon  their  ale-benches  talk  of  matters  of  the 
Church  or  State,  or  else  into  conventicles." 

Without  waiting  for  Pierce's  reply,  Charles  ordered  the  re- 
publication  of  his  father's  Declaration  of  Sports.  The  late  king,  he 
said,  had  "prudently  considered  that,  if  these  times  were  taken 
from  them,  the  meaner  sort  which  labor  hard  all  the  week  should 
have  no  recreations  at  all  to  refresh  their  spirits."  Once  more  it 
was  announced  from  the  throne  that  as  soon  as  the  Sunday  after- 
noon service  came  to  an  end,  the  king's  "good  people"  were  not  to 
"be  disturbed,  letted,  or  discouraged  from  any  lawful  recreation, 
such  as  dancing,  either  men  or  women,  archery  for  men,  leaping, 
vaulting,  or  any  other  such  harmless  recreation,  nor  from  having 
of  May-games,  Whit-ales  and  Morris  dances,  and  the  setting  up 
of  maypoles,  and  other  sports  therewith  used,  so  as  the  same  be 
had  in  due  and  convenient  time  without  impediment  or  neglect 
of  divine  service." 

As  yet  the  only  notion  of  liberty  entertained  by  either  of  the 
church  parties  was  the  removal  of  restrictions  which  the  opposite 
party  considered  it  all-important  to  impose.  The  Puritan  ob- 
jected to  the  compulsory  observance  of  the  Laudian  ceremonies. 
Laud  objected  to  the  compulsory  observance  of  the  Puritan 
Sabbath. 

It  was  necessary  that  the  king's  intentions  should  be  as  widely 
known  as  possible.  As  in  the  last  reign,  the  readiest  way  seemed 
to  be  to  order  the  clergy  to  read  the  Declaration  from  the  pulpit. 
Once  more  the  old  difficulty  occurred.  There  were  many  amongst 
the  clergy  to  whom  the  Declaration  was  mere  profanity,  and  some 
of  these  had  the  courage  to  act  upon  their  opinions.  One  London 
clergyman  read  the  Declaration  first,  and  the  ten  commandments 
afterwards.  "Dearly  beloved,"  he  then  said,  "ye  have  heard  the 
commandments  of  God  and  man,  obey  which  you  please."  Others 
preserved  an  obstinate  silence.  Many  were  suspended  or  deprived 
for  their  refusal.  It  is  true  that  Richardson  and  the  Somerset 
justices  had  not  scrupled  to  require  the  clergy  to  read  an  announce- 
ment of  an  opposite  character.  Laud  was  nothing  loath  to  follow 
their  example.  In  his  eyes  a  minister  was  bound,  like  a  constable 
or  a  justice  of  the  peace,  to  communicate  the  intentions  of  the 
government  to  the  people,  whenever  he  was  ordered  to  do  so  by 


Archbishop  Laud  and  the  Religious  Controversy    363 

the  proper  ecclesiastical  authorities.  If  the  Church  gained  in 
organization  in  Laud's  hands,  the  gain  was  compensated  by  the 
loss  of  much  of  its  spiritual  influence. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Hutton,  William  Laud,  a  sympathetic  but  valuable  work.  Hallam,  Con- 
stitutional History,  Vol.  I,  chap.  viii.  Ranke,  History  of  England,  Vol.  II, 
pp.  31  ff.  Waddington,  Congregational  History.  Masson,  Life  of  Milton, 
consult  index  under  titles,  "Laud"  and  "Puritanism." 


CHAPTER  IV 

LONG  PARLIAMENT  AND  THE  PEACEFUL  REVOLUTION 

AFTER  eleven  years  of  personal  government,  Charles  I  was  forced 
by  peculiar  circumstances  to  call  a  Parliament  and  yield  reluctantly 
to  its  demands  for  redress  of  grievances.  In  his  attempt  to  force 
on  the  Scotch  a  religious  service  very  much  like  that  in  use  in  Eng- 
land, he  had  stirred  up  a  rebellion  and  in  "The  Second  Bishops' 
War,"  as  it  is  called,  was  defeated  by  the  Scotch.  In  the 
preliminary  treaty  which  closed  the  struggle  Charles  stipulated  to 
pay  £840  a  day  until  the  permanent  peace  was  signed.  Unable  to 
raise  this  amount  he  had  recourse  again  to  Parliament,  and  the 
latter,  finding  the  king  in  a  dilemma,  took  advantage  of  the  oppor- 
tunity to  obtain  a  redress  of  grievances.  The  original  issues  of 
the  Puritan  Revolution  are  to  be  studied  in  the  work  of  this  Long 
Parliament  during  the  early  period  of  its  existence.  A  brief  sum- 
mary of  this  work  is  to  be  found  in  the  preface  to  Mr.  Gardiner's 
admirable  collection  of  documents,  from  which  the  account  given 
here  is  taken. 

§  i.    The  Triennial  Act  and  Impeachment  of  Straff ord l 

For  the  first  time  in  the  reign  of  Charles  I,  a  Parliament  met  with 
an  armed  force  behind  it.  Though  the  Scottish  army,  which  con- 
tinued to  occupy  the  northern  counties  till  August,  1641,  was  not 
directly  in  its  service,  it  depended  for  its  support  upon  the  money 
voted  by  the  English  Parliament,  and  would  consequently  have 
placed  itself  at  the  disposition  of  Parliament  if  Charles  had  threat- 
ened a  dissolution.  Charles  was  therefore  no  longer  in  a  position 
to  refuse  his  assent  to  bills  of  which  he  disapproved,  and  the  series 

1  Gardiner,  Constitutional  Documents  oj  the  Puritan  Revolution,  pp.  xxxi  ff. 
By  permission  of  the  Delegates  of  the  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford. 

364 


Long   Parliament  and  the   Peaceful   Revolution      365 

of  constitutional  acts  passed  during  the  first  ten  months  of  the 
existence  of  the  Long  Parliament  (November,  i64o-August,  1641), 
bear  witness  to  the  direction  taken  by  it  in  constitutional  matters. 
The  Triennial  Act  enacting  that  Parliament  was  to  meet  at  least 
once  in  three  years,  and  appointing  a  machinery  by  which  it  might 
be  brought  together  when  that  period  had  elapsed,  if  the  crown 
neglected  to  summon  it,  struck  at  Charles's  late  system  of  govern- 
ing without  summoning  Parliament  until  it  suited  him  to  do  so, 
but  it  did  nothing  to  secure  the  attention  of  the  king  to  the  wishes 
of  the  houses.  Whilst  measures  were  being  prepared  to  give 
effect  to  the  further  changes  necessary  to  diminish  the  king's 
authority,  the  attention  of  the  houses  and  of  the  country  was  fully 
occupied  by  the  impeachment,  which  was  ultimately  turned  into 
the  attainder  of  the  Earl  of  Strafford. 

No  great  constitutional  change  can  take  place  without  giving 
dire  offence  to  those  at  whose  expense  the  change  is  made,  and 
Parliament  had  therefore  from  the  very  beginning  of  its  existence 
to  take  into  account  the  extreme  probability  that  Charles,  if  he 
should  ever  regain  power,  would  attempt  to  set  at  naught  all  that 
it  might  do.  Against  this  they  attempted  to  provide  by  striking 
at  his  ministers,  especially  at  Strafford,  whom  they  knew  to  have 
been,  for  some  time,  his  chief  adviser,  and  whom  they  regarded  as 
the  main  supporter  of  his  arbitrary  government  in  the  past,  and 
also  as  the  man  who  was  likely  from  his  ability  and  strength  of  will 
to  be  most  dangerous  to  them  in  the  future,  in  the  event  of  an 
attempted  reaction.  They  imagined  that  if  he  were  condemned 
and  executed,  no  other  minister  would  be  found  daring  enough 
to  carry  out  the  orders  of  a  king  who  was  bent  upon  reducing 
Parliament  to  subjection.  They  therefore  impeached  him  as  a 
traitor,  on  the  ground  that  his  many  arbitrary  acts  furnished  evi- 
dence of  a  settled  purpose  to  place  the  king  above  the  law,  and  that 
such  a  purpose  was  tantamount  to  treason ;  because,  whilst  it  was 
apparently  directed  to  strengthening  the  king,  it  in  reality  weak- 
ened him  by  depriving  him  of  the  hearts  of  his  subjects. 

Whether  it  was  justifiable  or  not  to  put  Strafford  to  death  for 
actions  which  had  never  before  been  held  to  be  treasonable,  it  is 
certain  that  the  Commons,  in  imagining  that  Strafford's  death 
would  end  their  troubles,  underestimated  the  gravity  of  the  situa- 
tion. They  imagined  that  the  king,  in  breaking  through  what 
they  called  the  fundamental  laws,  had  been  led  astray  by  wicked 
counsel,  and  that  they  might  therefore  fairly  expect  that  when  his 
counsellors  were  punished  or  removed,  he  would  readily  acquiesce 


366  English  Historians 

in  changes  which  would  leave  him  all  the  legal  power  necessary 
for  the  well-being  of  the  State. 

Such  a  view  of  the  case  was,  however,  far  from  being  accurate. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  constitutional  arrangements  bequeathed 
by  the  Tudors  to  the  Stuarts  had  broken  down,  and  Charles  could 
argue  that  he  had  but  perpetuated  the  leadership  of  the  Tudors  in 
the  only  way  which  the  ambition  of  the  House  of  Commons  left 
open  to  him,  and  that  therefore  every  attempt  now  made  to  sub- 
ject him  to  Parliament  was  a  violation  of  those  constitutional 
rights  which  he  ought  to  exercise  for  the  good  of  the  nation.  It  is 
true  that  an  ideally  great  man  might  have  been  enlightened  by 
the  failure  of  his  projects;  but  Charles  was  very  far  from  being 
ideally  great,  and  it  was  therefore  certain  that  he  would  regard 
the  designs  of  the  Commons  as  ruinous  to  the  well-being  of  the 
kingdom  as  well  as  to  his  own  authority.  The  circumstances  of 
Strafford's  trial  increased  his  irritation,  and  he  had  recourse  to 
intrigues  with  the  English  army  which  still  remained  on  foot  in 
Yorkshire,  hoping  to  engage  it  in  his  cause  against  the  pretensions 
of  Parliament.  Against  these  intrigues  a  general  protestation  was 
directed.  It  was  drawn  up  by  Pym,  and  was  taken  by  every  mem- 
ber of  both  houses  as  a  token  of  their  determination  to  resist 
any  forcible  interference  with  their  proceedings.  It  was  rapidly 
followed  by  the  king's  assent,  given  under  stress  of  mob  violence, 
to  the  act  for  Strafford's  attainder. 

§  2.    The  Real  Position  of  King  and  Parliament 

On  the  day  on  which  the  king's  assent  to  Strafford's  death  was 
given,  he  also  consented  to  an  act  against  the  dissolution  of  the 
Long  Parliament  without  its  own  consent.  It  was  the  first  act 
which  indicated  the  new  issues  which  had  been  opened  by  the 
manifest  reluctance  of  Charles  to  accept  the  diminution  of  his 
power  on  which  Parliament  insisted.  Taking  into  account  the 
largeness  of  the  changes  proposed,  together  with  the  character  of 
the  king  from  whom  the  power  was  to  be  abstracted,  it  is  hardly 
possible  to  avoid  the  conclusion  that  nothing  short  of  a  change  of 
kings  would  meet  the  difficulties  of  the  situation.  Only  a  king 
who  had  never  known  what  it  was  to  exercise  the  old  powers  would 
feel  himself  at  his  ease  under  the  new  restrictions. 

However  reasonable  such  a  conclusion  may  be,  it  was  not  only 
impossible,  but  undesirable,  that  it  should  be  acted  on  at  once. 
Great  as  was  both  physically  and  morally  the  injury  inflicted  on 


Long  Parliament  and  the  Peaceful  Revolution     367 

the  country  by  the  attempt  of  Parliament  to  continue  working  with 
Charles,  the  nation  had  more  to  gain  from  the  effort  to  preserve 
the  continuity  of  its  traditions  than  it  had  to  lose  from  the  immedi- 
ate evil  results  of  its  mistake.  If  that  generation  of  Englishmen 
was  slow  to  realize  the  truth  in  this  matter,  and  suffered  great 
calamities  in  consequence,  its  very  tenacity  in  holding  firm  to 
the  impossible  solution  of  a  compromise  with  Charles  I  gave  bet- 
ter results  even  to  itself  than  would  have  ensued  if  it  had  been 
quick  to  discern  the  truth.  A  nation  which  easily  casts  itself 
loose  from  the  traditions  of  the  past  loses  steadiness  of  purpose, 
and,  ultimately  wearied  by  excitement,  falls  into  the  arms  of 
despotism. 

In  spite,  therefore,  of  the  appearance  of  chaos  in  the  history  of 
the  years  1640-1649,  the  forces  which  directed  events  are  easily 
to  be  traced.  During  the  first  months  of  the  Long  Parliament 
there  is  the  resolution  —  whilst  retaining  the  kingship  —  to  trans- 
fer the  general  direction  of  government  from  the  king  to  Parlia- 
ment, and  more  especially  to  the  House  of  Commons,  a  resolution 
which  at  first  seems  capable  of  being  carried  out  by  the  abolition 
of  the  institutions  which  had  given  an  exceptional  position  to  the 
Tudor  and  Stuart  sovereigns.  Later  on  there  is  the  gradual 
awakening  of  a  part  of  the  nation  to  the  truth  that  it  is  impossible 
to  carry  out  the  new  system  in  combination  with  Charles,  and  this 
leads  to  the  putting  forth  by  Parliament  of  a  claim  to  sovereignty, 
really  incompatible  with  kingship.  Even  those,  however,  who 
are  most  ready  to  break  with  the  past,  strive  hard  to  maintain 
political  continuity  by  a  succession  of  proposed  compromises, 
not  one  of  which  is  accepted  by  both  parties. 

§  3.   Additional  Constitutional  Gains  by  Parliament 

The  Tonnage  and  Poundage  Act,  which  became  law  on  June  22, 
bears  the  impress  of  the  first  of  these  movements.  On  the  one 
hand,  whilst  it  asserts  the  illegality  of  the  levy  of  customs-duties 
without  a  Parliamentary  grant,  it  gives  to  Charles  not  merely  the 
Tonnage  and  Poundage  given  to  his  father,  but  also  "such  other 
sums  of  money  as  have  been  imposed  upon  any  merchandise 
either  outward  or  inward  by  pretext  of  any  letters  patent,  commis- 
sion under  the  Great  Seal  of  England  or  Privy  Seal,  since  the  first 
year  of  his  late  Majesty  King  James,  of  blessed  memory,  and  which 
were  continued  and  paid  at  the  beginning  of  this  present  Par- 
liament." On  the  other  hand,  it  shows  how  greatly  Charles 


368  English  Historians 

was  distrusted  by  limiting  the  grant  to  less  than  two  months,  from 
May  25  to  July  15. 

The  circumstances  which  caused  this  distrust  are  revealed  in  the 
ten  propositions  for  a  political  and  religious  settlement.  The 
English  army  was  still  under  arms  in  Yorkshire,  and  though  it 
was  about  to  be  disbanded,  the  king  proposed  to  visit  Scotland 
with  the  intention,  as  was  then  suspected,  and  is  now  known, 
of  stirring  up  the  Scots  to  assist  him  in  England.  At  such  a  time 
it  may  well  have  seemed  unwise  to  make  the  king  financially 
independent,  and  subsequent  events  increasing  the  feeling,  the 
Tonnage  and  Poundage  Act  was  renewed  for  short  periods  only, 
till  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War  put  an  end  to  any  wish  to  supply 
the  king. 

In  spite  of  the  king's  hope  of  bringing  about  a  reaction  with 
Scottish  aid,  he  did  not  feel  himself  strong  enough  to  refuse  his 
assent  to  the  bills  prepared  for  cutting  off  the  powers  acquired  by 
the  Tudors,  and  on  July  5  he  gave  his  consent  to  the  act  for  the 
abolition  of  the  Star  Chamber  and  to  the  act  for  the  abolition  of 
the  High  Commission.  The  work  of  branding  with  illegality  the 
extraordinary  financial  means  to  which  he  had  himself  resorted 
was  completed  by  the  act  declaring  the  illegality  of  ship-money, 
the  act  for  the  limitation  of  forests,  and  the  act  prohibiting  the 
exaction  of  knighthood  fines. 

Thus  far  Parliament  had  been  practically  unanimous.  The 
constitution  which  had  been  virtually  modified  in  1629  to  the  profit 
of  monarchy  was  legally  modified  in  1641  to  the  disadvantage  of 
monarchy.  If  there  had  been  nothing  more  than  constitutional 
questions  at  issue,  it  is  highly  probable  that  if  the  king  had  con- 
tinued to  intrigue  with  the  object  of  redressing  forcibly  the  balance 
in  his  favor,  Parliament,  backed  by  the  active  part  of  the  nation, 
would  have  at  last  been  almost  unanimous  in  demanding  a  change 
of  sovereigns.  It  is  however  seldom,  if  it  is  ever  the  case,  that 
political  movements  are  determined  on  such  simple  lines.  Human 
action  is  influenced  by  many  motives,  and  as  the  political  current 
shifts  and  varies,  ideas  which  have  at  one  time  hardly  obtained 
recognition  rise  to  the  surface  and  become  all-important  in  the 
direction  of  events. 

§  4.   Propositions  for  Religious  Reforms 

At  the  end  of  August,  1641,  the  political  changes  which  had  been 
unanimously  adopted,  and  which,  with  the  exception  of  the  clauses 


Long  Parliament  and  the  Peaceful  Revolution     369 

in  the  Triennial  Act  for  the  automatic  assembling  of  Parliament, 
were  permanently  accepted  in  1660  by  the  government  of  the 
restoration,  had  been  accomplished.  Room  was  thereby  made 
for  the  consideration  of  another  class  of  changes  on  which  con- 
siderable difference  of  opinion  existed.  Something  must  be  done 
to  settle  the  Church  as  well  as  the  State,  and  excepting  so  far  as 
the  abolition  of  the  High  Commission  was  concerned,  there  was 
no  such  agreement  about  ecclesiastical  as  there  had  been  about 
political  reforms.  It  was  indeed  generally  desired  that  the  Church, 
like  the  State,  should  be  regulated  by  Parliamentary  law  rather 
than  by  the  royal  authority ;  and  that  an  end  must  be  put  to  the 
alterations  in  the  conduct  of  worship,  which  in  Laud's  eyes  were 
but  the  restoration  of  legal  order,  whilst  in  the  eyes  of  others  they 
were  unauthorized  innovations.  Further  than  this,  agreement 
was  not  to  be  had.  There  were  those  who  wished  Episcopacy 
and  the  Common  Prayer  Book  to  be  abolished,  and  there  were 
others  who  wished  them  to  be  retained  with  some  restraint  of  the 
authority  of  the  bishops,  and  with  some  more  or  less  slight  altera- 
tion of  the  form  of  prayer. 

These  two  tendencies  had  already  made  themselves  felt :  the 
first  in  the  Root  and  Branch  Petition,  concerning  manifold  evils 
in  the  Church,  presented  to  the  House  of  Commons  on  December  1 1, 
1640,  and  in  the  so-called  Root  and  Branch  Bill  for  transferring 
Episcopal  jurisdiction  to  Parliamentary  Commissioners,  which 
reached  the  committee  stage  in  the  House  of  Commons ;  the  second 
in  the  bill  on  Church  Reform,  which  was  read  twice  in  the  House 
of  Lords.  Neither  of  these  obtained  the  final  sanction  even  of 
the  House  in  which  it  had  been  introduced,  and  when  in  the 
beginning  of  September,  when  the  king  was  away  in  Scotland,  the 
houses  prepared  for  a  short  recess,  the  resolutions  of  the  Com- 
mons on  Ecclesiastical  Innovations  and  the  publication  of  an 
order  of  the  Lords  on  the  services  of  the  Church  showed  that 
there  were  at  least  divergent  tendencies  in  the  two  houses  as  far 
as  church  matters  were  concerned. 

The  event  which  precipitated  the  division  of  parties  was  the 
Ulster  Rebellion.  The  first  indication  that  the  majority  of  the 
Commons  felt  that,  with  a  war  in  Ireland  in  prospect,  it  was  neces- 
sary that  harmony  should  exist  between  the  crown  and  Parlia- 
ment is  to  be  found  in  the  Instructions  to  the  Commons'  Committee 
in  Scotland,  sent  up  to  the  Lords  on  November  8.  The  demand 
made  in  these  Instructions  was  for  the  appointment  of  councillors 
and  ministers  approved  by  Parliament.  To  grant  such  a  wish  would 


370  English  Historians 

practically  annihilate  the  independent  action  of  the  crown,  and 
the  division  of  parties  on  ecclesiastical  affairs  now  gave  to  the  king 
a  majority  of  the  Lords  and  a  large  minority  of  the  Commons  upon 
whom  he  could  rely.  All  those,  in  short,  who  wished  to  see  consider- 
able ecclesiastical  changes  made  in  the  Puritan  direction  supported 
the  authority  of  the  House  of  Commons,  whilst  those  who  wished 
the  changes  to  be  few  or  none  supported  the  authority  of  the  king. 
When  Charles  returned  to  London  on  November  25  his  speech  to 
the  Recorder  showed  that  he  was  aware  where  his  real  strength 
lay,  and  his  policy  was  completely  in  accord  with  his  conscience. 
On  December  i  a  deputation  of  the  Commons  presented  to  him 
the  Grand  Remonstrance,  which  had  been  carried  by  a  small 
majority  before  his  return.  After  setting  forth  at  length  the 
details  of  the  late  misgovernment,  the  House  asked  for  the  employ- 
ment of  ministers  in  whom  Parliament  might  confide,  and  for  the 
reference  of  church  reform  to  a  synod  of  divines  whose  conclusions 
might  be  confirmed  by  Parliament.  As  there  was  to  be  no  tolera- 
tion of  Non-conformity,  the  plan  of  the  framers  of  the  Grand  Re- 
monstrance was  to  substitute  the  general  enforcement  of  their  own 
form  of  church  government  and  worship  for  that  which  had  re- 
cently been  enforced  by  the  authority  of  the  king  and  the  bishops. 
On  December  10  Charles  answered  indirectly  by  a  Proclamation 
on  Religion,  and  directly  on  December  23  by  his  answer  to  the 
petition  accompanying  the  Grand  Remonstrance.  The  general 
outcome  of  the  discussion  was  that  the  House  of  Commons  wanted 
their  will  to  prevail  in  all  that  was  to  be  done,  whilst  the  king  was 
ready  to  hear  what  they  had  to  say  and  to  assent  to  just  as  much 
as  he  pleased.  If  only  an  appeal  to  force  could  be  averted,  the 
majority  of  the  Commons  had  the  game  in  their  own  hands.  They 
had  but  to  refuse  to  continue  the  grant  of  Tonnage  and  Poundage 
to  reduce  Charles  to  bankruptcy.  It  was  the  consciousness  that 
this  was  the  case  which  filled  the  air  with  rumors  of  Royalist  plots 
during  the  last  fortnight  of  December,  and  which  brought  a  mob 
of  apprentices  to  support  the  Commons  in  Palace  Yard,  and  a 
crowd  of  officers  who  had  served  in  the  now  disbanded  army  of 
the  north  to  support  the  king  at  Whitehall. 

Such  a  tension  of  feeling  could  not  last  long,  and  the  king  was 
the  first  to  move.  On  January  3,  1642,  his  attorney-general  im- 
peached five  leading  members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and 
one  member  of  the  House  of  Lords.  On  January  4  the  king  came 
in  person  to  the  House  of  Commons  to  seize  the  five  members. 
The  five  took  refuge  in  the  city,  which  rose  in  their  defence,  and 


Long  Parliament  and  the  Peaceful   Revolution      371 

Charles,  finding  the  forces  of  the  city  arrayed  against  him,  left 
Westminster  on  January  10.  On  January  17  the  Commons  set 
forth  a  declaration  telling  the  story  from  their  point  of  view,  and 
defending  their  own  constitutional  position. 

§  5.    The  Militia  Ordinance  and  Breach  between  King  and 
Parliament 

Though  the  king  absented  himself  from  Westminster,  negotia- 
tions between  him  and  the  Parliament  still  continued.  On  Feb- 
ruary 13  he  gave  his  consent  to  the  last  two  acts  which  became 
law  in  his  reign.  The  first  was  the  Clerical  Disabilities  Act,  by 
which  the  clergy  were  disabled  from  exercising  temporal  juris- 
diction and  the  bishops  were  deprived  of  their  votes  in  the  House 
of  Lords ;  the  other  the  Impressment  Act,  authorizing  the  impress- 
ment of  soldiers  for  the  service  of  Ireland.  The  fact  that  an 
army  was  being  brought  into  existence  for  Ireland  constituted  a 
danger  for  whichever  of  the  two  parties  failed  to  hold  military 
command,  and  this  last  act  was  soon  followed  by  a  claim  put  for- 
ward by  Parliament  to  appoint  the  lords  lieutenant  of  the 
counties,  who  were  at  the  head  of  the  militia  or  civilian  army 
which  was,  in  time  of  peace,  the  only  force  at  the  disposal  of  the 
king.  As  Charles,  naturally  enough,  refused  to  give  such  power 
into  the  hands  of  those  whom  he  regarded  as  his  enemies,  the 
houses,  on  March  5,  passed  a  militia  ordinance  to  the  effect 
which  they  desired.  An  ordinance  was  nothing  more  than  a  bill 
which  had  been  accepted  by  the  two  houses,  but  had  not  received 
the  royal  assent,  and  for  some  months  the  houses  had  claimed 
the  right  of  acting  on  such  ordinances  as  if  they  had  the  force  of 
law. 

For  the  next  few  months  a  long  and  wordy  controversy  on  the 
legality  of  this  step  arose.  In  the  Nineteen  Propositions  are  set 
forth  as  a  whole  the  constitutional  changes  demanded  by  the 
prevailing  party  at  Westminster.  They  would  simply  have  es- 
tablished government  by  persons  appointed  by  Parliament  in  lieu 
of  government  by  the  king,  and  they  may  therefore  be  taken  as 
definitely  marking  the  acceptance  by  the  majority  of  the  House 
of  Commons  of  the  idea  that  the  king's  sovereignty  must  not 
merely  be  weakened,  but  practically  set  aside.  Against  this  pro- 
posed system  were  enlisted  not  only  the  feelings  of  Charles,  but 
also  those  of  every  man  who  disliked  the  ecclesiastical  or  civil 
policy  of  the  houses.  In  other  words,  a  question  arose  whether 


372  English   Historians 

the  unlimited  power  of  the  houses  would  not  be  as  despotically 
vexatious  as  had  been  the  unlimited  power  of  the  king,  and  the 
solution  of  diminishing  the  sphere  of  government  by  enlarging 
the  sphere  of  individual  right  did  not  as  yet  occur  to  either  party. 
Civil  war  was  the  natural  result  of  such  a  condition  of  things. 
On  June  12  Charles  issued  Commissions  of  Array  to  summon 
the  militia  of  the  counties  to  his  side,  and  on  July  12  the  houses 
resolved,  in  addition  to  their  claim  to  command  the  militia,  to 
raise  an  army  and  place  it  under  the  command  of  the  Earl  of 
Essex.  On  August  22  the  king  raised  his  standard  at  Notting- 
ham, and  the  Civil  War  began  which  was  to  decide,  at  least  for 
a  time,  in  whose  hands  was  sovereignty  in  England. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Gardiner,  History  of  England,  1603-1642,  Vol.  IX,  consult  table  of  con- 
tents for  topics  mentioned  in  the  above  extract.  Gardiner,  Constitutional 
Documents  of  the  Puritan  Revolution,  for  the  important  documents.  Ranke, 
History  of  England,  Vol.  II,  pp.  215  ff.  Hallam,  Constitutional  History, 
Vol.  I,  chaps,  viii-ix. 


CHAPTER  V 

CHARLES  I  AND  HIS  ACCUSERS 

AFTER  their  triumph  in  the  Civil  War,  the  determined  opponents 
of  the  king,  especially  in  the  revolutionary  army,  confronted  a  very 
difficult  situation.  Believing  from  their  past  experience  that  the 
king  would  not  keep  faith,  they  expelled  his  sympathizers  from 
the  House  of  Commons.  The  remnant  of  the  House  then  com- 
posed of  the  army  party  erected  a  high  court  which  condemned 
the  king  to  death,  after  a  semblance  of  a  trial.  The  events  which 
followed  the  passage  of  the  sentence  are  fully  narrated  by  Mr. 
Gardiner,  who  then  closes  the  account  of  this  great  crisis  with  one 
of  the  most  remarkable  historical  judgments  ever  rendered. 

§  i .   Signing  the  Death  Warrant l 

The  protests  against  any  attempt  to  act  on  the  sentence  of  death 
against  the  king  were  many  and  loud.  The  members  of  the 
Assembly  of  Divines  joined  in  supplicating  for  the  king's  life, 
and  on  the  same  day  two  Dutch  ambassadors,  who  had  been 
specially  despatched  from  the  Netherlands  for  the  purpose,  made 
a  similar  request  to  the  House  of  Commons.  It  was  also  reported 
that  Fairfax  had  urged  the  Council  of  Officers  in  the  same  direc- 
tion, whilst  it  was  no  secret  that  the  Prince  of  Wales  had  sent  a 
blank  sheet  of  paper,  signed  and  sealed  by  himself,  on  which  the 
Parliament  might  inscribe  any  terms  they  pleased.  That  the 
vast  majority  of  the  English  people  would  have  accepted  this  offer 
gladly  was  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt. 

It  was  but  a  small  knot  of  men  —  a  bare  majority,  if  they  were 
even  that,  amongst  the  sitting  members  of  the  High  Court  of 
Justice  itself  —  who  had  fixedly  determined  that  there  should  be 

'Gardiner,  History  of  the  Great  Civil  War,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  314  ff.  By  per- 
mission of  Longmans,  Green,  &  Company,  Publishers. 

373 


374  English  Historians 

no  relenting;  but  they  had  Cromwell  amongst  them,  and  Crom- 
well's will,  when  once  his  mind  had  been  made  up,  was  abso- 
lutely inflexible.  They  had,  moreover,  behind  them  the  greater 
part  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  army,  to  whom  the  shortest  issue 
seemed  the  best. 

The  first  difficulty  encountered  by  those  who  were  bent  on  car- 
rying out  the  sentence  of  the  court  was  that  of  obtaining  signatures 
to  the  death  warrant  in  sufficient  numbers  to  give  even  an 
appearance  of  unanimity  amongst  the  judges.  On  Saturday, 
January  27,  1649,  a  few  more  signatures  had  been  added  to 
those  obtained  on  the  26th,  but  on  the  morning  of  Monday 
the  2gth  not  only  were  many  still  wanting,  but  there  was  reason 
to  believe  that  some  of  the  judges  who  had  already  signed  would 
refuse  to  repeat  their  signatures  if  called  on  to  do  so.  Yet  it  was 
impossible  to  make  use  of  the  warrant  in  its  existing  condition. 
It  had  been,  as  there  is  little  doubt,  dated  on  the  26th,  and  it 
presupposed  a  sentence  passed  on  that  day,  whereas  it  was  notori- 
ous that  no  sentence  had  been  passed  till  the  27th.  Under  these 
circumstances  the  natural  course  of  proceedings  would  have  been 
to  re-copy  the  warrant  with  altered  dates  and  to  have  it  signed 
afresh.  What  was  actually  done  was  to  erase  the  existing  date, 
and  to  make  such  other  alterations  as  were  requisite  to  bring  the 
whole  document  into  conformity  with  actual  facts.  Of  the  names 
of  the  three  officers  finally  charged  with  the  execution  of  the 
sentence,  Hacker,  Huncks,  and  Phayre,  that  of  Huncks  alone 
was  unaltered.  The  names  over  which  those  of  Hacker  and  Phayre 
were  written  are  now  illegible,  but  they  can  hardly  fail  to  have 
been  those  of  men  who  shrank  from  carrying  out  the  grim  duty 
assigned  to  them. 

Having  by  this  extraordinary  means  secured  the  retention  of 
the  signatures  already  given,  the  managers  of  the  business,  who- 
ever they  were,  applied  themselves  energetically  to  increase  the 
number.  The  testimony  of  those  regicides  who  pleaded  after  the 
Restoration  that  they  had  acted  under  compulsion  must,  indeed, 
be  received  with  the  utmost  caution;  but  there  is  no  reason  to 
doubt  that  considerable  pressure  was  put  upon  those  judges  who 
having  agreed  to  the  sentence  now  showed  a  disinclination  to  sign 
the  warrant.  In  all  the  stories  by  the  regicides  on  their  defence, 
Cromwell  takes  a  prominent  place,  and  it  is  easy  to  understand 
how  meanly  he  must  have  thought  of  men  who,  after  joining  in 
passing  the  sentence,  declined  to  sign  the  warrant.  When  those 
members  of  the  court  who  were  also  members  of  Parliament  took 


Charles  I  and  his  Accusers  375 

their  places  in  the  House,  Cromwell  is  reported  to  have  called  on 
them  to  sign  without  further  delay.  "Those  that  are  gone  in," 
he  said,  "shall  set  their  hands.  I  will  have  their  hands  now." 

Later  in  the  day,  when  the  warrant  lay  for  signature  on  a  table 
in  the  painted  chamber,  the  scene  grew  animated.  It  is  said  that 
Cromwell,  whose  pent-up  feelings  sometimes  manifested  them- 
selves in  horse-play,  drew  an  inky  pen  across  Marten's  face,  and 
that  Marten  inked  Cromwell's  face  in  return.  According  to 
another  story  which  was  for  a  long  time  accepted  as  true,  Crom- 
well dragged  Ingoldsby  to  the  table,  and  forced  him  to  sign  by 
grasping  his  hand  with  a  pen  in  it.  The  firmness  of  Ingoldsby's 
signature,  however,  contradicts  the  latter  part  of  the  assertion, 
though  it  is  possible  that  some  sort  of  compulsion  was  previously 
used  to  bring  him  to  the  point. 

On  the  whole  it  will  be  safe  to  assume  that  great  pressure  was 
put,  sometimes  in  rough  military  fashion,  on  those  who  hung 
back.  On  the  other  hand,  there  is  no  evidence  given  by  any  of 
the  regicides,  when  put  upon  their  trial,  of  any  definite  threats 
being  used  against  those  who  made  difficulties  about  signing. 
Downes,  indeed,  who  did  not  sign  at  all,  described  himself  as 
having  been  frightened  into  assenting  to  the  judgment,  but  he 
had  nothing  to  say  about  any  ill  effects  resulting  to  him  on  account 
of  his  refusal  to  sign. 

In  one  way  or  another  fifty-nine  signatures  were  at  last  obtained. 
Nine  out  of  these  sixty-seven  who  had  given  sentence  did  not  sign ; 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  Ingoldsby,  who  signed  the  warrant,  had 
been  absent  when  the  sentence  was  passed.  .  .  . 

§  2.   Mr.  Gardiner 's  Judgment  of  the  Puritan  Revolution 

Those  who  brought  Charles  to  the  scaffold  strengthened  the 
revulsion  of  feeling  in  his  favor  which  had  begun  to  set  in  ever 
since  it  had  been  clearly  brought  home  to  the  nation  that  its 
choice  lay  between  the  rule  of  the  king  and  the  rule  of  the  sword. 
It  is  indeed  true  that  the  feeling  hostile  to  the  army  was  not  created 
by  the  execution  of  Charles,  but  its  intensity  was  greatly  strength- 
ened by  the  horror  caused  by  the  spectacle  of  sufferings  so  meekly 
endured. 

Charles's  own  patience,  and  the  gentleness  with  which  he  met 
harshness  and  insult,  together  with  his  own  personal  dignity,  won 
hearts  which  might  otherwise  have  been  steeled  against  his  pre- 
tensions. The  often-quoted  lines  of  Andrew  Marvell  set  forth 


376  English  Historians 

the  impression  which  Charles's  bearing  on  the  scaffold  produced 
dn  even  hostile  spectators :  — 

He  nothing  common  did  or  mean 
Upon  that  memorable  scene, 

But  with  his  keener  eye 

The  axe's  edge  did  try; 
Nor  called  the  gods,  with  vulgar  spite, 
To  vindicate  his  helpless  right; 

But  bowed  his  comely  head 

Down,  as  upon  a  bed. 

Marvell's  verses  embodied  his  own  recollections  of  the  external 
dignity  of  the  man.  A  little  book,  which  under  the  title  of  Eikon 
Basilike  was  issued  with  calculated  timeliness  to  the  world  on 
February  9,  the  day  after  the  king's  funeral,  purported  to  be  the 
product  of  Charles's  own  pen,  and  aimed  at  being  a  spiritual 
revelation  of  the  inmost  thoughts  of  the  justest  of  sovereigns 
and  the  most  self-denying  of  martyrs.  Its  real  author,  Dr.  John 
Gauden,  a  nominally  Presbyterian  divine,  caught  with  great  felicity 
the  higher  motives  which  were  never  absent  from  Charles's  mind, 
and  gave  to  the  narratives  and  meditations  of  which  the  book  con- 
sisted enough  of  dramatic  veracity  to  convince  all  who  were  pre- 
pared to  believe  it  that  they  had  before  them  the  real  thoughts  of 
the  man  who  had  died  because  he  refused  to  sacrifice  law  and 
religion  to  an  intriguing  Parliament  and  a  ruffianly  army.  The 
demand  for  the  book  was  well-nigh  unlimited.  Edition  after 
edition  was  exhausted  almost  as  soon  as  it  left  the  press.  The 
greedily  devoured  volumes  served  to  create  an  ideal  image  of 
Charles  which  went  far  to  make  the  permanent  overthrow  of  the 
monarchy  impossible. 

The  ideal  thus  created  had  the  stronger  hold  on  men's  minds 
because  it  faithfully  produced  at  least  one  side  of  Charles's  char- 
acter. The  other  side  —  his  persistent  determination  to  ignore 
all  opinions  divergent  from  his  own,  and  to  treat  all  by  whom 
they  were  entertained  as  knaves  or  fools  —  had  been  abundantly 
illustrated  in  the  course  of  the  various  negotiations  which  had 
been  carried  on  from  time  to  time  in  the  course  of  the  Civil  War. 
It  finally  led  to  a  struggle  for  the  possession  of  that  Negative 
Voice  which,  if  only  the  king  could  succeed  in  retaining  it,  would 
enable  him  to  frustrate  all  new  legislation  even  when  supported 
by  a  determined  national  resolve.  On  the  one  side  were  undoubt- 
edly both  law  and  tradition;  on  the  other  side  the  necessity  of 


Charles  I   and  his  Accusers  377 

shaping  legislation  by  the  wishes  of  the  nation,  and  not  by  the 
wishes  of  any  single  man  or  of  a  single  class. 

Fortunately  or  unfortunately,  such  abstract  considerations  sel- 
dom admit  of  direct  application  to  politics.  It  is  at  all  times 
hard  to  discover  what  the  wishes  of  a  nation  really  are,  and  least 
of  all  can  this  be  done  amidst  the  fears  and  passions  of  a  revolu- 
tionary struggle.  Only  after  long  years  does  a  nation  make  clear 
its  definite  resolve,  and  for  this  reason  wise  statesmen  —  whether 
monarchical  or  republican  —  watch  the  currents  of  opinion  and 
submit  to  compromises  which  will  enable  the  national  sentiment 
to  make  its  way  without  a  succession  of  violent  shocks.  Charles's 
fault  lay  not  so  much  in  his  claim  to  retain  the  Negative  Voice  as 
in  his  absolute  disregard  of  the  conditions  of  the  time,  and  of  the 
feelings  and  opinions  of  every  class  of  his  subjects  with  which 
he  happened  to  disagree.  Even  if  those  who  opposed  Charles 
in  the  later  stages  of  his  career  failed  to  rally  the  majority  of  the 
people  to  their  side,  they  were  undoubtedly  acting  in  accordance 
with  a  permanent  national  demand  for  that  government  of  com- 
promise which  slowly  but  irresistibly  developed  itself  in  the  course 
of  the  century. 

Nor  can  it  be  doubted  that  if  Charles  had,  under  any  con- 
ditions, been  permitted  to  re-seat  himself  on  the  throne,  he  would 
quickly  have  provoked  a  new  resistance.  As  long  as  he  remained 
a  factor  in  English  politics,  government  by  compromise  was  im- 
possible. His  own  conception  of  government  was  that  of  a  wise 
prince  constantly  interfering  to  check  the  madness  of  the  people. 
In  the  Tsle  of  Wight  he  wrote  down  with  approval  the  lines  in  which 
Claudian,  the  servile  poet  of  the  court  of  Honorius,  declared  it  to 
be  an  error  to  give  the  name  of  slavery  to  the  service  of  the  best  of 
princes,  and  asserted  that  liberty  never  had  a  greater  charm  than 
under  a  pious  king.  Even  on  the  scaffold  he  reminded  his  sub- 
jects that  a  share  in  the  government  was  nothing  appertaining  to 
the  people.  It  was  the  tragedy  of  Charles's  life  that  he  was  en- 
tirely unable  to  satisfy  the  cravings  of  those  who  inarticulately 
hoped  for  the  establishment  of  a  monarchy  which,  while  it  kept 
up  the  old  traditions  of  the  country,  and  thus  saved  England 
from  a  blind  plunge  into  an  unknown  future,  would  yet  allow  the 
people  of  the  country  to  be  to  some  extent  masters  of  their  own 
destiny. 

Yet  if  Charles  persistently  alienated  this  large  and  important 
section  of  his  subjects,  so  also  did  his  most  determined  opponents. 
The  very  merits  of  the  Independents  —  their  love  of  toleration 


378  English   Historians 

and  of  legal  and  political  reform,  together  with  their  advocacy  of 
democratic  change  —  raised  opposition  in  a  nation  which  was  pre- 
pared for  none  of  these  things,  and  drove  them  step  by  step  to  rely 
on  armed  strength  rather  than  upon  the  free  play  of  constitutional 
action.  But  for  this  it  is  probable  that  the  Vote  of  No  Addresses 
would  have  received  a  practically  unanimous  support  in  the  Parlia- 
ment and  the  nation,  and  that  in  the  beginning  of  1648  Charles 
would  have  been  dethroned  and  a  new  government  of  some  kind 
or  other  established  with  good  hope  of  success.  As  it  was,  in 
their  despair  of  constitutional  support,  the  Independents  were  led 
in  spite  of  their  better  feelings  to  the  employment  of  the  army  as 
an  instrument  of  government. 

The  situation,  complicated  enough  already,  had  been  still 
further  complicated  by  Charles's  duplicity.  Men  who  would 
have  been  willing  to  come  to  terms  with  him  despaired  of  any 
constitutional  arrangement  in  which  he  was  to  be  a  factor,  and 
men  who  had  long  been  alienated  from  him  were  irritated  into 
active  hostility.  By  these  he  was  regarded  with  increasing  in- 
tensity as  the  one  disturbing  force  with  which  no  understanding 
was  possible  and  no  settled  order  consistent.  To  remove  him  out 
of  the  way  appeared,  even  to  those  who  had  no  thought  of  punish- 
ing him  for  past  offences,  to  be  the  only  possible  road  to  peace 
for  the  troubled  nation.  It  seemed  that  so  long  as  Charles 
lived,  deluded  nations  and  deluded  parties  would  be  stirred  up 
by  promises  never  intended  to  be  fulfilled,  to  fling  themselves, 
as  they  had  flung  themselves  in  the  second  Civil  War,  against 
the  new  order  of  things  which  was  struggling  to  establish  itself 
in  England. 

Of  this  latter  class  Cromwell  made  himself  the  mouthpiece. 
Himself  a  man  of  compromises,  he  had  been  thrust,  sorely  against 
his  will,  into  direct  antagonism  with  the  uncompromising  king. 
He  had  striven  long  to  mediate  between  the  old  order  and  the 
new,  first  by  restoring  Charles  as  a  constitutional  king,  and  after- 
wards by  substituting  one  of  his  children  for  him.  Failing  in  this, 
and  angered  by  the  persistence  with  which  Charles  stirred  up 
Scottish  armies  and  Irish  armies  against  England,  Cromwell 
finally  associated  himself  with  those  who  cried  out  most  loudly  for 
the  king's  blood.  No  one  knew  better  than  Cromwell  that  it  was 
folly  to  cover  the  execution  of  the  king  with  the  semblance  of 
constitutional  propriety,  and  he  may  well  have  thought  that,  though 
law  and  constitution  had  both  broken  down,  the  first  step  to  be 
taken  towards  their  reconstruction  was  the  infliction  of  the  penalty 


Charles  I  and  his  Accusers  379 

of  death  upon  the  man  who  had  shown  himself  so  wanting  in  that 
elemental  quality  of  veracity  upon  which  laws  and  constitutions 
are  built  up.  All  that  is  known  of  Cromwell's  conduct  at  the 
trial  —  his  anger  with  Downes's  scruples  and  the  pressure  which 
he  put  upon  those  who  were  unwilling  to  sign  the  death-warrant  — 
point  to  his  contempt  for  the  legal  forms  with  which  others  were 
attempting  to  cover  an  action  essentially  illegal. 

Tradition  has  handed  down  an  anecdote  which  points  to  the 
same  explanation  of  the  workings  of  Cromwell's  mind.  "The 
night  after  King  Charles  was  beheaded,"  it  is  said,  "my  Lord 
Southampton  and  a  friend  of  his  got  leave  to  sit  up  by  the  body 
in  the  banqueting  house  at  Whitehall.  As  they  were  sitting  very 
melancholy  there,  about  two  o'clock  in  the  morning  they  heard  the 
tread  of  somebody  coming  very  slowly  upstairs.  By  and  by  the 
door  opened,  and  a  man  entered  very  much  muffled  up  in  his 
cloak,  and  his  face  quite  hid  in  it.  He  approached  the  body,  con- 
sidered it  very  attentively  for  some  time,  and  then  shook  his  head, 
sighed  out  the  words,  'Cruel  necessity!'  He  then  departed  in 
the  same  slow  and  concealed  manner  as  he  had  come.  Lord 
Southampton  used  to  say  that  he  could  not  distinguish  anything 
of  his  face ;  but  that  by  his  voice  and  gait  he  took  him  to  be  Oliver 
Cromwell." 

Whether  the  necessity  really  existed  or  was  but  the  tyrant's 
plea  is  a  question  upon  the  answer  to  which  men  have  long  dif- 
fered, and  will  probably  continue  to  differ.  All  can  perceive  that 
with  Charles's  death  the  main  obstacle  to  the  establishment  of 
a  constitutional  system  was  removed.  Personal  rulers  might 
indeed  reappear,  and  Parliament  had  not  yet  so  displayed  its 
superiority  as  a  governing  power  to  make  Englishmen  anxious  to 
dispense  with  monarchy  in  some  form  or  other.  The  monarchy, 
as  Charles  understood  it,  had  disappeared  forever.  Insecurity  of 
tenure  would  make  it  impossible  for  future  rulers  long  to  set  pub- 
lic opinion  at  naught,  as  Charles  had  done.  The  scaffold  at  White- 
hall accomplished  that  which  neither  the  eloquence  of  Eliot  and 
Pym  nor  the  statutes  and  ordinances  of  the  Long  Parliament  had 
been  capable  of  effecting. 

So  far  the  work  of  Cromwell  and  his  associates  had  been  purely 
negative.  They  had  overthrown  everything ;  they  had  constituted 
nothing.  They  fondly  hoped  that  when  the  obstacle  to  peace  had 
been  removed,  they  would  be  able  securely  to  walk  in  the  ways 
of  peace.  It  was  not  so  to  be.  The  sword  destroys  but  it  can  do 
no  more,  and  it  would  be  left  for  others  than  the  stern  warriors 


380  English   Historians 

who  guarded  the  scaffold  of  the  king  to  build  up  slowly  and  pain- 
fully that  edifice  of  constitutional  compromise  for  which  Crom- 
well had  cleared  the  ground. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Compare  the  judgment  given  above  by  Gardiner  with  those  rendered 
by  Morley,  Firth,  and  Harrison  in  their  lives  of  Cromwell.  Hallam,  Con- 
stitutional History,  Part  I,  chap.  x.  Ranke,  History  oj  England,  Vol.  II, 
chap.  vi. 


CHAPTER   VI 

CROMWELL  AND   PARLIAMENT 

THE  Puritans  found  opposition  and  fighting  a  great  deal  easier 
than  governing  a  country  which  was  royalist  at  heart.  They  did 
not  dare  to  call  a  freely  elected  Parliament  and  let  the  nation 
decide  on  the  form  of  government  to  be  adopted.  The  remnant 
of  the  Long  Parliament  which  continued  to  sit  after  the  execution 
of  the  king  was  divided  into  factions,  and  many  of  the  members 
were  corruptly  seeking  their  own  advancement.  When  Crom- 
well urged  this  Parliament  to  dissolve  itself,  it  proposed  that  the 
members  then  sitting  should  be  continued  in  the  new  Parliament 
without  election  and  should  exercise  the  right  to  exclude  new  mem- 
bers whom  they  did  not  approve.  This  roused  the  ire  of  Crom- 
well, and  in  April,  1653,  he  forcibly  dissolved  the  assembly  but 
refused  to  call  an  elected  Parliament  which  he  had  been  urging. 

§  i.    The  Issues  between  the  Army  and  Parliament 1 

The  military  revolution  of  1653  is  the  next  tall  landmark  after 
the  execution  of  the  king.  It  is  almost  a  commonplace  that  "we 
do  not  know  what  party  means  if  we  suppose  that  its  leader  is  its 
master, "  and  the  real  extent  of  Cromwell's  power  over  the  army 
is  hard  to  measure.  In  the  spring  of  1647,  when  the  first  violent 
breach  between  army  and  Parliament  took  place,  the  extremists 
swept  him  off  his  feet.  Then  he  acquiesced  in  Pride's  Purge,  but 
he  did  not  originate  it.  In  the  action  that  preceded  the  trial  and 
despatching  of  the  king  it  seems  to  have  been  Harrison  who  took 
the  leading  part.  In  1653  Cromwell  said,  "Major-General  Har- 
rison is  an  honest  man,  and  aims  at  good  things;  yet  from  the 
impatience  of  his  spirit,  he  will  not  wait  the  Lord's  leisure,  but 

1  Morley,  Cromwell,  pp.  329  ff.  By  permission  of  The  Century  Com- 
pany, Publishers. 


382  English  Historians 

hurries  one  into  that  which  he  and  all  honest  men  will  have  cause 
to  repent."  If  we  remember  how  hard  it  is  to  fathom  decisive 
passages  in  the  history  of  our  own  time,  we  see  how  much  of  that 
which  we  would  most  gladly  know  in  the  distant  past  must  ever 
remain  a  surmise.  But  the  best  opinion  in  respect  of  the  revolution 
of  April,  1653,  seems  to  be  that  the  Royalists  were  not  wrong  who 
wrote  that  Cromwell's  authority  in  the  army  depended  much  on 
Harrison  and  Lambert  and  their  fanatical  factions;  that  he  was 
forced  to  go  with  them  in  order  to  save  himself;  and  that  he  was 
the  member  of  the  triumvirate  who  was  most  anxious  to  wait  the 
Lord's  leisure  yet  a  while  longer. 

The  immediate  plea  for  the  act  of  violence  that  now  followed  is 
as  obscure  as  any  other  of  Cromwell's  proceedings.  In  the  closing 
months  of  1652  he  once  more  procured  occasions  of  conference 
between  himself  and  his  officers  on  the  one  hand,  and  members  of 
Parliament  on  the  other.  He  besought  the  Parliament  men  by 
their  own  means  to  bring  forth  of  their  own  accord  the  good  things 
that  had  been  promised  and  were  so  long  expected  —  "so  tender 
were  we  to  preserve  them  in  the  reputation  of  the  people."  The 
list  of  "good  things"  demanded  by  the  army  in  the  autumn  of 
1652  hardly  supports  the  modern  exaltation  of  the  army  as  the 
seat  of  political  sagacity.  The  payment  of  arrears,  the  suppres- 
sion of  vagabonds,  the  provision  of  work  for  the  poor,  were  objects 
easy  to  ask,  but  impossible  to  achieve.  The  request  for  a  new 
election  was  the  least  sensible  of  all. 

When  it  was  known  that  the  army  was  again  waiting  on  God  and 
confessing  its  sinfulness,  things  were  felt  to  look  grave.  Seeing  the 
agitation,  the  Parliament  applied  themselves  in  earnest  to  frame  a 
scheme  for  a  new  representative  body.  The  army  believed  that 
the  scheme  was  a  sham,  and  that  the  semblance  of  giving  the 
people  a  real  right  of  choice  was  only  to  fill  up  vacant  seats  by 
such  persons  as  the  House  now  in  possession  should  approve. 
This  was  nothing  less  than  to  perpetuate  themselves  indefinitely. 
Cromwell  and  the  officers  had  a  scheme  of  their  own:  that  the 
Parliament  should  name  a  certain  number  of  men  of  the  right  sort, 
and  these  nominees  should  build  a  constitution.  The  Parliament, 
in  other  words,  was  to  abdicate  after  calling  a  constituent  con- 
vention. On  April  19  a  meeting  took  place  in  Oliver's  apartment 
at  Whitehall  with  a  score  of  the  more  important  members  of 
Parliament.  There  the  plan  of  the  officers  and  the  rival  plan  of 
Vane  and  his  friends  were  brought  face  to  face.  What  the  exact 
scheme  of  the  Parliament  was,  we  cannot  accurately  tell,  and  we 


Cromwell  and   Parliament  383 

are  never  likely  to  know.  Cromwell's  own  descriptions  of  it  are 
vague  and  unintelligible.  The  bill  itself  he  carried  away  with 
him  under  his  cloak  when  the  evil  day  came,  and  no  copy  of  it 
survived.  It  appears,  however,  that  in  Vane's  belief  the  best 
device  for  a  provisional  government  —  and  no  other  than  a  pro- 
visional government  was  then  possible  —  was  that  the  remnant 
should  continue  to  sit,  the  men  who  fought  deadly  battles  at  West- 
minster in  1647  and  1648,  the  men  who  had  founded  the  Common- 
wealth in  1649,  tne  men  wno  had  carried  on  its  work  with  extraor- 
dinary energy  and  success  for  four  years  and  more.  These  were 
to  continue  to  sit  as  a  nucleus  for  a  full  representative,  joining  to 
themselves  such  new  men  from  the  constituencies  as  they  thought 
not  likely  to  betray  the  cause.  On  the  whole  we  may  believe  that 
this  was  perhaps  the  least  unpromising  way  out  of  difficulties  where 
nothing  was  very  promising.  It  was  to  avoid  the  most  fatal  of  all 
the  errors  of  the  French  Constituent,  which  excluded  all  its  mem- 
bers from  office  and  from  seats  in  the  Legislative  Assembly  to 
whose  inexperienced  hands  it  was  intrusting  the  government  of 
France.  To  blame  its  authors  for  fettering  the  popular  choice  was 
absurd  in  Cromwell,  whose  own  proposal  instead  of  a  legislature 
to  be  partially  and  periodically  renewed  (if  that  was  really  what 
Vane  meant)  was  now  for  a  nominated  council  without  any  ele- 
ment of  popular  choice  at  all.  The  army,  we  should  not  forget, 
were  even  less  prepared  than  the  Parliament  for  anything  like  a 
free  and  open  general  election.  Both  alike  intended  to  reserve 
Parliamentary  representation  exclusively  to  such  as  were  godly 
men  tnd  faithful  to  the  interests  of  the  Commonwealth.  An  open 
general  election  would  have  been  as  hazardous  and  probably  as 
disastrous  now  as  at  any  moment  since  the  defeat  of  King  Charles 
in  the  field,  and  a  real  appeal  to  the  country  would  only  have 
meant  ruin  to  the  good  cause.  Neither  Cromwell,  nor  Lambert, 
nor  Harrison,  nor  any  of  them,  dreamed  that  a  Parliament  to  be 
chosen  without  restrictions  would  be  a  safe  experiment.  The  only 
questions  were :  what  the  restrictions  were  to  be,  who  was  to  im- 
pose them,  who  was  to  guard  and  supervise  them.  The  Parlia- 
mentary Remnant  regarded  themselves  as  the  fittest  custodians,  and 
it  is  hard  to  say  that  they  were  wrong.  In  judging  these  events  of 
1653  we  must  look  forward  to  events  three  years  later.  Cromwell 
had  a  Parliament  of  his  own  in  1654;  it  consisted  of  four  hundred 
and  sixty  members;  almost  his  first  step  was  to  prevent  more  than 
a  hundred  of  them  from  taking  their  seats.  He  may  have  been 
right;  but  why  was  the  Parliament  wrong  for  acting  on  the  same 


384  English   Historians 

principle?  He  had  another  Parliament  in  1656,  and  again  he 
began  by  shutting  out  nearly  a  hundred  of  its  elected  members. 
When  the  army  cried  for  a  dissolution,  they  had  no  ideas  as  to  the 
Parliament  that  was  to  follow.  At  least  this  much  is  certain :  that 
whatever  failure  might  have  overtaken  the  plan  of  Vane  and  the 
Parliament,  it  could  not  have  been  more  complete  than  the  failure 
that  overtook  the  plan  of  Cromwell. 

Apart  from  the  question  of  the  constitution  of  Parliament,  and 
perhaps  regarding  that  as  secondary,  Cromwell  quarrelled  with 
what,  rightly  or  wrongly,  he  describes  as  the  ultimate  ideal  of 
Vane  and  his  friends.  We  should  have  had  fine  work,  he  said 
four  years  later  —  a  council  of  State  and  a  Parliament  of  four 
hundred  men  executing  arbitrary  government,  and  continuing  the 
existing  usurpation  of  the  duties  of  the  law  courts  by  legislature 
and  executive.  Undoubtedly  "a  horrid  degree  of  arbitrariness" 
was  practised  by  the  Rump,  but  some  allowance  was  to  be  made 
for  a  government  in  revolution;  and  if  that  plea  be  not  good  for 
the  Parliament,  one  knows  not  why  it  should  be  good  for  the  no 
less  "horrid  arbitrariness"  of  the  Protector.  As  for  the  general 
character  of  the  constitution  here  said  to  be  contemplated  by  the 
Remnant,  it  has  been  compared  to  the  French  convention  of  1793 ; 
but  a  less  odious  and  a  truer  parallel  would  be  with  the  Swiss 
Confederacy  to-day.  However  this  may  be,  if  dictatorship  was 
indispensable,  the  dictatorship  of  an  energetic  Parliamentary  oli- 
garchy was  at  least  as  hopeful  as  that  of  an  oligarchy  of  soldiers. 
When  the  soldiers  had  tried  their  hands  and  failed,  it  was  to  some 
such  plan  as  this  that,  after  years  of  turmoil  and  vicissitude, 
Milton  turned.  At  worst  it  was  no  plan  that  either  required  or 
justified  violent  deposition  by  a  file  of  troopers. 

§  2.   Forcible  Dissolution  oj  Parliament 

The  conference  in  Cromwell's  apartments  at  Whitehall  on 
April  10  was  instantly  followed  by  one  of  those  violent  outrages 
for  which  we  have  to  find  a  name  in  the  dialect  of  continental 
revolution.  It  had  been  agreed  that  discussion  should  be  resumed 
the  next  day,  and  meanwhile  that  nothing  should  be  done  with 
the  bill  in  Parliament.  When  the  next  morning  came,  news  was 
brought  to  Whitehall  that  the  members  had  already  assembled, 
were  pushing  the  bill  through  at  full  speed,  and  that  it  was  on  the 
point  of  becoming  law  forthwith.  At  first  Cromwell  and  the 
officers  could  not  believe  that  Vane  and  his  friends  were  capnblr 


Cromwell  and   Parliament  385 

of  such  a  breach  of  their  word.  Soon  there  came  a  second  mes- 
senger and  a  third,  with  assurance  that  the  tidings  were  true,  and 
that  not  a  moment  was  to  be  lost  if  the  bill  was  to  be  prevented 
from  passing.  It  is  perfectly  possible  that  there  was  no  breach 
of  word  at  all.  The  Parliamentary  probabilities  are  that  the 
news  of  the  conference  excited  the  jealousy  of  the  private  members, 
as  arrangements  between  front  benches  are  at  all  times  apt  to  do ; 
that  they  took  the  business  into  their  own  hands,  and  that  the 
leaders  were  powerless.  In  astonishment  and  anger,  Cromwell,  in 
no  more  ceremonial  apparel  than  his  plain  black  clothes  and  gray 
worsted  stockings,  hastened  to  the  House  of  Commons.  He 
ordered  a  guard  of  soldiers  to  go  with  him.  That  he  rose  that 
morning  with  the  intention  of  following  the  counsels  that  the  im- 
patience of  the  army  had  long  prompted,  and  finally  completing 
the  series  of  exclusions,  mutilations,  and  purges  by  breaking  up 
the  Parliament  altogether,  there  is  no  reason  to  believe.  Long 
premeditation  was  never  Cromwell's  way.  He  waited  for  the 
indwelling  voice,  and  more  than  once,  in  the  rough  tempests  of 
his  life,  that  demoniac  voice  was  a  blast  of  coarse  and  uncontrolled 
fury.  Hence  came  one  of  the  most  memorable  scenes  of  English 
history.  There  is  a  certain  discord  as  to  details  among  our  too 
scanty  authorities,  some  even  describing  the  fatal  transaction  as 
passing  with  much  modesty  and  as  little  noise  as  can  be  imagined. 
The  description  derived  by  Ludlow  who  was  not  present,  from 
Harrison  who  was,  gathers  up  all  that  seems  material.  There 
appear  to  have  been  between  fifty  and  sixty  members  present. 

"  Cromwell  sat  down  and  heard  the  debate  for  some  time.  Then 
calling  to  Major- General  Harrison,  who  was  on  the  other  side  of 
the  House,  to  come  to  him,  he  told  him  that  he  judged  the  Parlia- 
ment ripe  for  a  dissolution  and  this  to  be  the  time  for  doing  it. 
The  major-general  answered,  as  he  since  told  me,  'Sir,  the  work 
is  very  great  and  dangerous:  therefore  I  desire  you  seriously  to 
consider  of  it  before  you  engage  in  it.'  'You  say  well,'  replied 
the  general,  and  thereupon  sat  still  for  about  a  quarter  of  an  hour. 
Then,  the  question  for  passing  the  bill  being  to  be  put,  he  said 
to  Major-General  Harrison,  'This  is  the  time:  I  must  do  it,' 
and  suddenly  standing  up  made  a  speech,  wherein  he  loaded  the 
Parliament  with  the  vilest  reproaches,  charging  them  not  to  have 
a  heart  to  do  anything  for  the  public  good,  to  have  espoused  the 
corrupt  interest  of  presbytery  and  the  lawyers,  who  were  the  sup- 
porters of  tyranny  and  oppression,  accusing  them  of  an  intention 
to  perpetuate  themselves  in  power;  they  had  not  been  forced  to 


386  English  Historians 

the  passing  of  this  act,  which  he  affirmed  they  designed  never  to 
observe,  and  thereupon  told  them  that  the  Lord  had  done  with 
them  and  had  chosen  other  instruments  for  the  carrying  on  His 
work  that  were  more  worthy.  This  he  spoke  with  so  much  passion 
and  discomposure  of  mind  as  if  he  had  been  distracted.  Sir 
Peter  Wentworth  stood  up  to  answer  him,  and  said  that  this  was 
the  first  time  that  he  had  ever  heard  such  unbecoming  language 
given  to  the  Parliament,  and  that  it  was  the  more  horrid  in  that  it 
came  from  their  servant,  and  their  servant  whom  they  had  so 
highly  trusted  and  obliged.  But,  as  he  was  going  on,  the  general 
stepped  into  the  midst  of  the  House,  where,  continuing  his  dis- 
tracted language,  he  said,  'Come,  come:  I  will  put  an  end  to 
your  prating.'  Then,  walking  up  and  down  the  House  like  a 
madman,  and  kicking  the  ground  with  his  feet,  he  cried  out,  'You 
are  no  Parliament;  I  say  you  are  no  Parliament;  I  will  put  an 
end  to  your  sitting;  call  them  in,  call  them  in.'  Whereupon  the 
sergeant  attending  the  Parliament  opened  the  doors;  and  Lieu- 
tenant-Colonel Wolseley,  with  two  files  of  musketeers,  entered  the 
House,  which  Sir  Henry  Vane  observing  from  his  place  said 
aloud,  'This  is  not  honest;  yea,  it  is  against  morality  and  com- 
mon honesty.'  Then  Cromwell  fell  a-railing  at  him,  crying  out 
with  a  loud  voice,  'Oh,  Sir  Henry  Vane,  Sir  Henry  Vane,  the 
Lord  deliver  me  from  Sir  Henry  Vane!'  Then,  looking  to  one 
of  the  members,  he  said:  'There  sits  a  drunkard'  .  .  .  and, 
giving  much  reviling  language  to  others,  he  commanded  the  mace 
to  be  taken  away,  saying,  'What  shall  we  do  with  this  bauble? 
There,  take  it  away.'  He  having  brought  all  into  this  disorder, 
Major-General  Harrison  went  to  the  speaker  as  he  sat  in  the  chair, 
and  told  him  that,  seeing  things  were  reduced  to  this  pass,  it  would 
not  be  convenient  for  him  to  remain  there.  The  speaker  answered 
that  he  would  not  come  down  unless  he  were  forced.  'Sir,'  said 
Harrison,  'I  will  lend  you  my  hand';  and  thereupon,  putting  his 
hand  within  his,  the  speaker  came  down.  Then  Cromwell  ap- 
plied himself  to  the  members  of  the  House  .  .  .  and  said  to  them, 
'It  is  you  that  have  forced  me  to  do  this,  for  I  have  sought  the 
Lord  night  and  day  that  He  would  rather  slay  me  than  put  me 
on  the  doing  of  this  work ! '  (Then)  Cromwell  .  .  .  ordered  the 
House  to  be  cleared  of  all  the  members  .  .  .  after  which  he  went 
to  the  clerk,  and  snatching  the  Act  of  Dissolution,  which  was 
ready  to  pass,  out  of  his  hand,  he  put  it  under  his  cloak,  and, 
having  commanded  the  doors  to  be  locked  up,  went  away  to 
Whitehall." 


Cromwell  and  Parliament  387 


§  3-   Significance  of  the  Dissolution  of  Parliament 

The  fierce  work  was  consummated  in  the  afternoon.  Crom- 
well heard  that  the  Council  of  State,  the  creation  of  the  destroyed 
legislature,  was  sitting  as  usual.  Thither  he  repaired  with  Lam- 
bert and  Harrison  by  his  side.  He  seems  to  have  recovered  com- 
posure. "If  you  are  met  here  as  private  persons,"  Cromwell  said, 
"you  shall  not  be  disturbed;  but  if  as  a  Council  of  State,  this  is 
no  place  for  you ;  and  since  you  cannot  but  know  what  was  done 
at  the  House  this  morning,  so  take  notice  that  the  Parliament  is 
dissolved."  Bradshaw,  who  was  in  the  chair,  was  not  cowed. 
He  had  not  quailed  before  a  more  dread  scene  with  Charles  four 
years  ago.  "Sir,"  he  replied,  "we  have  heard  what  you  did  at 
the  House  this  morning,  and  before  many  hours  all  England  will 
hear  it ;  but,  sir,  you  are  mistaken  to  think  that  the  Parliament  is 
dissolved ;  for  no  power  under  heaven  can  dissolve  them  but  them- 
selves; therefore  take  you  notice  of  that." 

Whatever  else  is  to  be  said,  it  is  well  to  remember  that  to  con- 
demn the  Rump  is  to  go  a  long  way  towards  condemning  the  revo- 
lution. To  justify  Cromwell's  violence  in  breaking  it  up,  is  to  go 
a  long  way  toward  justifying  Hyde  and  even  Strafford.  If  the 
Commons  had  really  sunk  into  the  condition  described  by  Oliver 
in  his  passion,  such  ignominy  showed  that  the  classes  represented 
by  it  were  really  incompetent,  as  men  like  Strafford  had  always 
deliberately  believed,  to  take  that  supreme  share  in  governing  the 
country  for  which  Pym  and  his  generation  of  reformers  had  so 
manfully  contended.  For  the  Remnant  was  the  quintessence  left 
after  a  long  series  of  elaborate  distillations.  They  were  not 
Presbyterians,  moderates,  respectables,  bourgeois,  pedants,  Giron- 
dins.  They,  the  great  majority  of  them,  were  the  men  who  had 
resisted  a  continuance  of  the  negotiations  at  Newport.  They 
had  made  themselves  accomplices  in  Pride's  Purge.  They  had 
ordered  the  trial  of  the  king.  They  had  set  up  the  Commonwealth 
without  lords  or  monarch.  They  were  deep  in  all  the  proceed- 
ings of  Cromwellian  Thorough.  They  were  the  very  cream  after 
purification  upon  purification.  If  they  could  not  govern,  who 
could  ? 

We  have  seen  the  harsh  complaints  of  Cromwell  against  the 
Parliament  in  1652:  how  selfish  its  members  were;  how  ready  to 
break  into  factions;  how  slow  in  business;  how  scandalous  the 
lives  of  some  of  them.  Yet  this  seems  little  better  than  the  im- 


388  English  Historians 

patient  indictment  of  the  soldier,  if  we  remember  how  only  a  few 
months  before  the  French  agent  had  told  Mazarin  of  the  new 
rulers  of  the  Commonwealth:  "Not  only  were  they  powerful  by 
sea  and  land,  but  they  live  without  ostentation.  .  .  .  They  were 
economical  in  their  private  expenses,  and  prodigal  in  their  devotion 
to  public  affairs,  for  which  each  one  toils  as  if  for  his  personal 
interests.  They  handle  large  sums  of  money,  which  they  admin- 
ister *honestly."  We  cannot  suppose  that  two  years  had  trans- 
formed such  men  into  the  guilty  objects  of  Cromwell's  censorious 
attack.  Cromwell  admitted,  after  he  had  violently  broken  them 
up,  that  there  were  persons  of  honor  and  integrity  among  them 
who  had  eminently  appeared  for  God  and  for  the  public  good 
both  before  and  throughout  the  war.  It  would  in  truth  have  been 
ludicrous  to  say  otherwise  of  a  body  that  contained  patriots  so 
unblemished  in  fidelity,  energy,  and  capacity  as  Vane,  Scot,  Brad- 
shaw,  and  others.  Nor  is  there  any  good  reason  to  believe  that 
these  men  of  honor  and  integrity  were  a  hopeless  minority.  We 
need  not  indeed  suppose  that  the  Rump  was  without  time-servers. 
Perhaps  no  deliberate  assembly  in  the  world  ever  is  without  them, 
for  time-serving  has  its  roots  in  human  nature.  The  question  is 
what  proportion  the  time-servers  bore  to  the  whole.  There  is  no 
sign  that  it  was  large.  But  whether  large  or  small,  to  deal  with 
time-servers  is  part,  and  no  inconsiderable  part,  of  the  statesman's 
business,  and  it  is  hard  to  see  how  with  this  poor  breed  Oliver 
could  have  dealt  worse. 

Again,  in  breaking  up  Parliament  he  committed  what  in  modern 
politics  is  counted  the  inexpiable  sin  of  breaking  up  his  party. 
This  was  the  gravest  of  all.  This  was  what  made  the  Revolution 
of  1653  a  turning-point.  The  Presbyterians  hated  him  as  the 
greatest  of  Independents.  He  had  already  set  a  deep  gulf  between 
himself  and  the  Royalists  of  every  shade  by  killing  the  king.  To 
the  enmity  of  the  legitimists  of  a  dynasty  was  now  added  the 
enmity  of  the  legitimists  of  Parliament.  By  destroying  the  Par- 
liamentary Remnant  he  set  a  new  gulf  between  himself  and  most 
of  the  best  men  on  his  own  side.  Where  was  the  policy  ?  What 
foundations  had  he  left  himself  to  build  upon  ?  What  was  his 
calculation,  or  had  he  no  calculation,  of  forces,  circumstances, 
individuals,  for  the  step  that  was  to  come  next  ?  When  he  stamped 
in  wrath  out  of  the  desecrated  House,  had  he  ever  firmly  counted 
the  cost  ?  Or  was  he  in  truth  as  improvident  as  King  Charles  had 
been  when  he,  too,  marched  down  the  same  floor  eleven  years  ago  ? 
In  one  sense  his  own  creed  erected  improvidence  into  a  principle. 


Cromwell  and  Parliament  389 

"Own  your  call,"  he  says  to  the  first  of  his  own  Parliaments,  "for 
it  is  marvellous,  and  it  hath  been  unprojected.  It's  not  long  since 
either  you  or  we  came  to  know  of  it.  And  indeed  this  hath  been 
the  way  God  dealt  with  us  all  along.  To  keep  things  from  our 
eyes  all  along,  so  that  we  have  seen  nothing  in  all  His  dispensations 
long  beforehand."  And  there  is  the  famous  saying  of  his,  that 
"he  goes  furthest  who  knows  not  where  he  is  going,"  —  of  which 
Retz  said  that  it  showed  Cromwell  to  be  a  simpleton.  We  may 
at  least  admit  the  peril  of  a  helmsman  who  does  not  forecast  his 
course. 

It  is  true  that  the  situation  was  a  revolutionary  one,  and  the 
Remnant  was  no  more  a  legal  Parliament  than  Cromwell  was  a 
legal  monarch.  The  constitution  had  long  vanished  from  the 
stage.  From  the  day  in  May,  1641,  when  the  king  had  assented 
to  the  bill,  making  a  dissolution  depend  on  the  will  of  Parliament, 
down  to  the  days  in  March,  1649,  when  the  mutilated  Commons 
abolished  the  House  of  Lords  and  the  office  of  king,  story  after 
story  of  the  constitutional  fabric  had  come  crashing  to  the  ground. 
The  Rump  alone  was  left  to  stand  for  the  old  tradition  of  Parlia- 
ment and  it  was  still  clothed,  even  in  the  minds  of  those  who  were 
most  querulous  about  its  present  failure  of  performance,  with  a 
host  of  venerated  associations  —  the  same  associations  that  had 
lifted  up  men's  hearts  all  through  the  fierce  tumults  of  civil  war. 
The  rude  destruction  of  the  Parliament  gave  men  a  shock  that 
awakened  in  some  of  them  angry  distrust  of  Cromwell,  in  others  a 
broad  resentment  at  the  overthrow  of  the  noblest  of  experiments, 
and  in  the  largest  class  of  all,  deep  misgivings  as  to  the  past,  silent 
self-q  testioning  whether  the  whole  movement  since  1641  had  not 
been  a  grave  and  terrible  mistake. 

Guizot  truly  says  of  Cromwell  that  he  was  one  of  the  men  who 
know  that  even  the  best  course  in  political  action  always  has  its 
drawbacks,  and  who  accept,  without  flinching,  the  difficulties  that 
might  be  laid  upon  them  by  their  own  decisions.  This  time,  how- 
ever, the  day  was  not  long  in  coming  when  Oliver  saw  reason  to 
look  back  with  regret  upon  those  whom  he  now  handled  with  such 
impetuous  severity.  When  he  quarrelled  with  the  first  Parlia- 
ment of  his  Protectorate,  less  than  two  years  hence,  he  used  his 
old  foes,  if  foes  they  were,  for  a  topif  of  reproach  against  his  new 
ones.  "I  will  say  this  on  behalf  of  the  Long  Parliament,  that  had 
such  an  expedient  as  this  government  (the  Instrument)  been  pro- 
posed to  them,  and  could  they  have  seen  the  cause  of  God  pro- 
vided for,  and  been  by  debates  enlightened  in  the  grounds  of  it, 


390  English  Historians 

whereby  the  difficulties  might  have  been  cleared  to  them,  and  the 
reason  of  the  whole  enforced,  and  the  circumstances  of  time  and 
persons,  with  the  temper  and  disposition  of  the  people,  and  affairs 
both  abroad  and  at  home  might  have  been  well  weighed,  I  think 
in  my  conscience  —  well  as  they  were  thought  to  love  their  seats  — 
they  would  have  proceeded  in  another  manner  than  you  have 
done."  To  cut  off  in  a  fit  of  passion  the  chance  of  such  a  thing 
was  a  false  step  that  he  was  never  able  to  retrieve. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Gardiner,  History  of  the  Commonwealth  and  Protectorate,  especially  on 
the  coup  d'etat  of  1653.  Hallam,  Constitutional  History,  Pt.  2,  chap.  x. 
Ranke,  History  of  England,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  71  ff.  Source  materials  in  Gardiner, 
Constitutional  Documents  of  the  Puritan  Revolution. 


CHAPTER   VII 

THE   RESTORATION   SETTLEMENT   IN   STATE  AND   CHURCH 

ALL  during  the  Puritan  Revolution  the  majority  of  English 
people  were  doubtless  loyal  to  the  king,  and  when  Cromwell  died 
in  1658,  factions  broke  out  in  the  army,  by  wJjiclualone  the  Protec- 
torate had  been  maintained.  The  people,  moreover,  were  heartily 
tired  of  an  absolutism  more  expensive  and  galling  than  the  personal 
government  of  Charles  I.  The  restoration  of  the  monarchy  was 
inevitable.  In  1660  a  freely  elected  convention  Parliament  met, 
and  having  received  fair  promises  from  Charles  II  in  his  Declara- 
tion of  Breda,  it  announced  that  "according  to  the  ancient 
and  fundamental  laws  of  this  kingdom,  the  government  is  and 
ought  to  be  by  King,  Lords,  and  Commons."  In  May,  1660, 
Charles  landed  in  England  and  was  duly  invested  with  royal 
authority. 

§  i.   The  Restoration  and  Problems  for  Settlement1 

It  is  universally  acknowledged  that  no  measure  was  ever  more 
national,  or  has  ever  produced  more  testimonies  of  public  approba- 
tion, than  the  restoration  of  Charles  II.  Nor  can  this  be  attributed 
to  the  usual  fickleness  of  the  multitude.  For  the  late  govern- 
ment, whether  under  the  Parliament  or  the  Protector,  had  never 
obtained  the  sanction  of  popular  consent,  nor  could  have  subsisted 
for  a  day  without  the  support  of  the  army.  The  king's  return 
seemed  to  the  people  the  harbinger  of  a  real  liberty,  instead  of  that 
bastard  Commonwealth  which  had  insulted  them  with  its  name  — 
a  liberty  secure  from  enormous  assessments,  which,  even  when 
lawfully  imposed,  the  English  had  always  paid  with  reluctance,  and 
from  the  insolent  despotism  of  the  soldiery.  The  young  and  lively 
looked  forward  to  a  release  from  the  rigors  of  fanaticism,  and  were 
too  ready  to  exchange  that  hypocritical  austerity  of  the  late  times 
for  a  licentiousness  and  impiety  that  became  characteristic  of  the 

1  Hallam,  Constitutional  History  of  England,  Vol.  II,  pp.  68  ff. 
391 


392  English  Historians 

present.  In  this  tumult  of  exulting  hope  and  joy  there  was  much 
to  excite  anxious  forebodings  in  calmer  men;  and  it  was  by  no 
means  safe  to  pronounce  that  a  change  so  generally  demanded, 
and  in  most  respects  so  expedient,  could  be  effected  without  very 
serious  sacrifices  of  public  and  particular  interests. 

Four  subjects  of  great  importance,  and  some  of  them  very 
difficult,  occupied  the  convention  Parliament  from  the  time  of  the 
king's  return  till  their  dissolution  in  the  following  December:  a 
general  indemnity  and  legal  oblivion  of  all  that  had  been  done  amiss 
in  the  late  interruption  of  government;  an  adjustment  of  the 
claims  for  reparation  which  the  crown,  the  Church,  and  private 
loyalists  had  to  prefer;  a  provision  for  the  king's  revenue,  con- 
sistent with  the  abolition  of  military  tenures;  and  the  settlement 
of  the  Church.  These  were,  in  effect,  the  articles  of  a  sort  of  treaty 
between  the  king  and  the  nation,  without  some  legislative  pro- 
visions as  to  which  no  stable  or  tranquil  course  of  law  could  be 
expected. 

§  2.   Punishment  of  the  Revolutionists 

The  king  in  his  well-known  Declaration  from  Breda,  dated  the 
i4th  of  April,  had  laid  down,  as  it  were,  certain  bases  of  his 
restoration,  as  to  some  points  which  he  knew  to  excite  much  ap- 
prehension in  England.  One  of  these  was  a  free  and  general 
pardon  to  all  his  subjects,  saving  only  such  as  should  be  excepted 
by  Parliament.  It  had  always  been  the  king's  expectation,  or 
at  least  that  of  his  chancellor,  that  all  who  had  been  immediately 
concerned  in  his  father's  death  should  be  delivered  up  to  punish- 
ment; and,  in  the  most  unpropitious  state  of  his  fortunes,  while 
making  all  professions  of  pardon  and  favor  to  different  parties, 
he  had  constantly  excepted  the  regicides.  Monk,  however,  had 
advised,  in  his  first  messages  to  the  king,  that  none,  or  at  most 
not  above  four,  should  be  excepted  on  this  account;  and  the  Com- 
mons voted  that  not  more  than  seven  persons  should  lose  the  bene- 
fit of  the  indemnity  both  as  to  life  and  estate.  Yet,  after  having 
named  seven  of  the  late  king's  judges,  they  proceeded  in  a  few 
days  to  add  several  more,  who  had  been  concerned  in  managing  his 
trial,  or  otherwise  forward  in  promoting  his  death.  They  went  on 
to  pitch  upon  twenty  persons,  whom,  on  account  of  their  deep 
concern  in  the  transactions  of  the  last  twelve  years,  they  deter- 
mined to  affect  with  penalties  not  extending  to  death  and  to  be 
determined  by  some  future  act  of  Parliament.  As  their  passions 
grew  warmer,  and  the  wishes  of  the  court  became  better  known, 


Restoration  Settlement  in   State  and  Church      393 

they  came  to  except  from  all  benefit  of  the  indemnity  such  of  the 
king's  judges  as  had  not  rendered  themselves  to  justice  according 
to  the  late  proclamation.  In  this  state  the  bill  of  indemnity  and 
oblivion  was  sent  up  to  the  Lords.  But  in  that  House  the  old 
Royalists  had  a  more  decisive  preponderance  than  among  the 
Commons.  They  voted  to  except  all  who  had  signed  the  death- 
warrant  against  Charles  I,  or  sat  when  sentence  was  pronounced, 
and  five  others  by  name,  —  Hacker,  Vane,  Lambert,  Haslerig,  and 
Axtell.  They  struck  out,  on  the  other  hand,  the  clause  reserving 
Lenthall  and  the  rest  of  the  same  class  for  future  penalties.  They 
made  other  alterations  in  the  bill  to  render  it  more  severe;  and 
with  these,  after  a  pretty  long  delay,  and  a  positive  message  from 
the  king,  requesting  them  to  hasten  their  proceedings  (an  irregu- 
larity to  which  they  took  no  exception,  and  which  in  the  eyes  of 
the  nation  was  justified  by  circumstances),  they  returned  the  bill 
to  the  Commons. 

The  vindictive  spirit  displayed  by  the  Upper  House  was  not 
agreeable  to  the  better  temper  of  the  Commons,  where  the  Pres- 
byterian or  moderate  party  retained  great  influence.  Though  the 
king's  judges  (such,  at  least,  as  had  signed  the  death-warrant)  were 
equally  guilty,  it  was  consonant  to  the  practice  of  all  humane 
governments  to  make  a  selection  for  capital  penalties;  and  to  put 
forty  or  fifty  persons  to  death  for  that  offence  seemed  a  very  sangui- 
nary course  of  proceeding,  and  not  likely  to  promote  the  concilia- 
tion and  oblivion  so  much  cried  up.  But  there  was  a  yet  stronger 
objection  to  this  severity.  The  king  had  published  a  proclamation, 
in  a  cew  days  after  his  landing,  commanding  his  father's  judges 
to  render  themselves  up  within  fourteen  days,  on  pain  of  being 
excepted  from  any  pardon  or  indemnity,  either  as  to  their  lives  or 
estates.  Many  had  voluntarily  come  in,  having  put  an  obvious 
construction  on  this  proclamation.  It  seems  to  admit  of  little 
question  that  the  king's  faith  was  pledged  to  those  persons,  and 
that  no  advantage  could  be  taken  of  any  ambiguity  in  the  procla- 
mation without  as  real  perfidiousness  as  if  the  words  had  been  more 
express.  They  were  at  least  entitled  to  be  set  at  liberty,  and  to  have 
a  reasonable  time  allowed  for  making  their  escape,  if  it  were 
determined  to  exclude  them  from  the  indemnity.  The  Commons 
were  more  mindful  of  the  king's  honor  and  their  own  than  his 
nearest  advisers.  But  the  violent  Royalists  were  gaining  ground 
among  them,  and  it  ended  in  a  compromise.  They  left  Hacker  and 
Axtell,  who  had  been  prominently  concerned  in  the  king's  death, 
to  their  fate.  They  even  admitted  the  exceptions  of  Vane  and 


394  English  Historians 

Lambert,  contenting  themselves  with  a  joint  address  of  both 
houses  to  the  king,  that,  if  they  should  be  attainted,  execution  as  to 
their  lives  might  be  remitted.  Haslerig  was  saved  on  a  division 
of  one  hundred  and  forty-one  to  one  hundred  and  sixteen,  partly 
through  the  intercession  of  Monk,  who  had  pledged  his  word  to 
him.  Most  of  the  king's  judges  were  entirely  excepted ;  but  with 
a  proviso  in  favor  of  such  as  had  surrendered  according  to  the 
proclamation,  that  the  sentence  should  not  be  executed  without 
a  special  act  of  Parliament.  Others  were  reserved  for  penalties 
not  extending  to  life,  to  be  inflicted  by  a  future  act.  About  twenty 
enumerated  persons,  as  well  as  those  who  had  pronounced  sentence 
of  death  in  any  of  the  late  illegal  high  courts  of  justice,  were  ren- 
dered incapable  of  any  civil  or  military  office.  Thus  after  three 
months'  delay,  which  had  given  room  to  distrust  the  boasted 
clemency  and  forgiveness  of  the  victorious  Royalists,  the  Act  of 
Indemnity  was  finally  passed. 

Ten  persons  suffered  death  soon  afterwards  for  the  murder 
of  Charles  I,  and  three  more  who  had  been  seized  in  Holland 
after  a  considerable  lapse  of  time.  There  can  be  no  reasonable 
ground  for  censuring  either  the  king  or  the  Parliament  for  their 
punishment,  except  that  Hugh  Peters,  though  a  very  odious  fanatic, 
was  not  so  directly  implicated  in  the  king's  death  as  many  who 
escaped,  and  the  execution  of  Scrape,"  who  had  surrendered  under 
the  proclamation,  was  an  inexcusable  breach  of  faith.  But  nothing 
can  be  more  sophistical  than  to  pretend  that  such  men  as  Hollis 
and  Annesley,  who  had  been  expelled  from  Parliament  by  the 
violence  of  the  same  faction  who  put  the  king  to  death,  were  not 
to  vote  for  their  punishment,  or  to  sit  in  judgment  on  them,  because 
they  had  sided  with  the  Commons  in  the  civil  war.  It  is  mentioned 
by  many  writers,  and  in  the  Journals,  that  when  Mr.  Lenthall,son 
of  the  late  speaker,  in  the  very  first  days  of  the  Convention  Parlia- 
ment, was  led  to  say  that  those  who  had  levied  war  against  the  king 
were  as  blamable  as  those  who  had  cut  off  his  head,  he  received  a 
reprimand  from  the  chair,  which  the  folly  and  dangerous  con- 
sequence of  his  position  well  deserved ;  for  such  language  though 
it  seems  to  have  been  used  by  him  in  extenuation  of  the  regicides, 
was  quite  in  the  tone  of  the  violent  Royalists. 

§  3.  Adjustment  of  the  Land  Claims 

A  question  apparently  far  more  difficult  was  that  of  restitution 
and  redress.  The  crown  lands,  those  of  the  Church,  the  estates 


Restoration  Settlement  in  State  and  Church     395 

in  certain  instances  of  eminent  Royalists  had  been  sold  by  the 
authority  of  the  late  usurpers,  and  that  not  at  very  low  rates,  con- 
sidering the  precariousness  of  the  title.  This  naturally  seemed  a 
material  obstacle  to  the  restoration  of  ancient  rights,  especially  in 
the  case  of  ecclesiastical  corporations,  whom  men  are  commonly 
less  disposed  to  favor  than  private  persons.  The  clergy  them- 
selves had  never  expected  that  their  estates  would  revert  to  them  in 
full  propriety,  and  would  probably  have  been  contented,  at  the 
moment  of  the  king's  return,  to  grant  easy  leases  to  the  purchasers. 
Nor  were  the  House  of  Commons,  many  of  whom  were  interested 
in  these  sales,  inclined  to  let  in  the  former  owners  without  condi- 
tions. A  bill  was  accordingly  brought  into  the  House  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  session  to  confirm  sales,  or  give  indemnity  to  the 
purchasers.  I  do  not  find  its  provisions  more  particularly  stated. 
The  zeal  of  the  Royalists  soon  caused  the  crown  lands  to  be  ex- 
cepted.  But  the  House  adhered  to  the  principle  of  composition 
as  to  ecclesiastical  property,  and  kept  the  bill  a  long  time  in  debate. 

At  the  adjournment  in  September  the  chancellor  told  them  his 
Majesty  had  thought  much  upon  the  business,  and  done  much  for 
the  accommodation  of  many  particular  persons,  and  doubted  not  but 
that,  before  they  met  again,  a  good  progress  would  be  made,  so  that 
the  persons  concerned  would  be  much  to  blame  if  they  received 
not  full  satisfaction,  promising  also  to  advise  with  some  of  the  Com- 
mons as  to  that  settlement.  These  expressions  indicate  a  design 
to  take  the  matter  out  of  the  hands  of  Parliament.  For  it  was 
Hyde's  firm  resolution  to  replace  the  Church  in  the  whole  of  its 
property,  without  any  other  regard  to  the  actual  possessors  than 
the  right  owners  should  severally  think  it  equitable  to  display. 
And  this,  as  may  be  supposed,  proved  very  small.  No  further 
steps  were  taken  on  the  meeting  of  Parliament  after  the  adjourn- 
ment, and  by  the  dissolution  the  parties  were  left  to  the  common 
course  of  law.  The  Church,  the  crown,  the  dispossessed  Royalists, 
reentered  triumphantly  on  their  lands  ;  there  were  no  means  of 
repelling  the  owners'  claim,  nor  any  satisfaction  to  be  looked  for 
by  the  purchasers  under  so  defective  a  title.  It  must  be  owned 
that  the  facility  with  which  this  was  accomplished  is  a  striking 
testimony  to  the  strength  of  the  new  government  and  the  con- 
currence of  the  nation.  This  is  the  more  remarkable,  if  it  be  true, 
as  Ludlow  informs  us,  that  the  chapter  lands  had  been  sold  by  the 
trustees  appointed  by  Parliament  at  the  clear  income  of  fifteen  or 
seventeen  years'  purchase. 

The  great  body,  however,  of  the  suffering  cavaliers,  who  had 


396  English  Historians 

compounded  for  their  delinquency  under  the  ordinances  of  the 
Long  Parliament,  or  whose  estates  had  been  for  a  time  in  seques- 
tration, found  no  remedy  for  these  losses  by  any  process  of  law. 
The  Act  of  Indemnity  put  a  stop  to  any  suits  they  might  have 
instituted  against  persons  concerned  in  carrying  these  illegal  or- 
dinances into  execution.  They  were  compelled  to  put  up  with 
their  poverty,  having  the  additional  mortification  of  seeing  one 
class,  namely,  the  clergy,  who  had  been  engaged  in  the  same 
cause,  not  alike  in  their  fortune,  and  many  even  of  the  vanquished 
republicans  undisturbed  in  wealth  which,  directly  or  indirectly, 
they  deemed  acquired  at  their  own  expense.  They  called  the 
statute  an  Act  of  Indemnity  for  the  king's  enemies,  and  of  oblivion 
for  his  friends.  They  murmured  at  the  ingratitude  of  Charles,  as 
if  he  were  bound  to  forfeit  his  honor  and  risk  his  throne  for  their 
sakes.  They  conceived  a  deep  hatred  of  Clarendon,  whose  steady 
adherence  to  the  great  principles  of  the  Act  of  Indemnity  is  the 
most  honorable  act  of  his  public  life.  And  the  discontent  engen- 
dered by  their  disappointed  hopes  led  to  some  part  of  the  oppo- 
sition afterwards  experienced  by  the  king  and  still  more  certainly 
to  the  coalition  against  the  minister. 

§  4.   Abolition  of  Ancient  Feudal  Burdens 

No  one  cause  had  so  eminently  contributed  to  the  dissensions 
between  the  crown  and  Parliament,  in  the  last  two  reigns,  as  the 
disproportion  between  the  public  revenues  under  a  rapidly  in- 
creasing depreciation  in  the  value  of  money  and  the  exigencies,  at 
least  on  some  occasions,  of  the  administration.  There  could  be 
no  apology  for  the  parsimonious  reluctance  of  the  Commons  to 
grant  supplies,  except  the  constitutional  necessity  of  rendering 
them  the  condition  of  redress  of  grievances;  and  in  the  present 
circumstances,  satisfied,  as  they  seemed  at  least  to  be,  with  the 
securities  they  had  obtained,  and  enamoured  of  their  new  sovereign, 
it  was  reasonable  to  make  some  further  provision  for  the  current 
expenditure.  Yet  this  was  to  be  meted  out  with  such  prudence  as 
not  to  place  him  beyond  the  necessity  of  frequent  recurrence  to 
their  aid.  A  committee  was  accordingly  appointed  "to  consider  of 
settling  such  a  revenue  on  his  Majesty  as  may  maintain  the  splendor 
and  grandeur  of  his  kingly  office,  and  preserve  the  crown  from  want 
and  from  being  undervalued -by  his  neighbors."  By  their  report 
it  appeared  that  the  revenue  of  Charles  I  from  1637  to  1641  had 
amounted  on  an  average  to  about  £900,000,  of  which  full  £200,000 


Restoration  Settlement  in  State  and  Church      397 

arose  from  sources  either  not  warranted  by  law  or  no  longer  available. 
The  House  resolved  to  raise  the  present  king's  income  to  £1,200,000 
per  annum,  a  sum  perhaps  sufficient  in  those  times  for  the  ordinary 
charges  of  government.  But  the  funds  assigned  to  produce  his 
revenue  soon  fell  short  of  the  Parliament's  calculation. 

One  ancient  fountain  that  had  poured  its  stream  into  the  royal 
treasury  it  was  now  determined  to  close  up  forever.  The  feudal 
tenures  had  brought  with  them  at  the  Conquest,  or  not  long  after, 
those  incidents,  as  they  were  usually  called,  or  emoluments  of 
seigniory,  which  remained  after  the  military  character  of  fiefs  had 
been  nearly  effaced,  especially  the  right  of  detaining  the  estates  of 
minors  holding  in  chivalry  without  accounting  for  the  profits. 
This  galling  burden,  incomparably  more  ruinous  to  the  tenant  than 
beneficial  to  the  lord,  it  had  long  been  determined  to  remove. 
Charles,  at  the  treaty  of  Newport,  had  consented  to  give  it  up  for 
a  fixed  revenue  of  £100,000,  and  this  was  almost  the  only  part 
of  that  ineffectual  compact  which  the  present  Parliament  were 
anxious  to  complete.  The  king,  though  likely  to  lose  much 
patronage  and  influence,  and  what  passed  with  lawyers  for  a  high 
attribute  of  his  prerogative,  could  not  decently  refuse  a  commu- 
tation so  evidently  advantageous  to  the  aristocracy.  No  great 
difference  of  opinion  subsisting  as  to  the  expediency  of  taking  away 
military  tenures,  it  remained  only  to  decide  from  what  resources 
the  commutation  revenue  should  spring.  Two  schemes  were 
suggested  :  the  one,  a  permanent  tax  on  lands  held  in  chivalry 
(which,  as  distinguished  from  those  in  socage,  were  alone  liable 
to  the  feudal  burdens) ;  the  other  an  excise  on  beer  and  some  other 
liquors.  It  is  evident  that  the  former  was  founded  on  a  just  prin- 
ciple, while  the  latter  transferred  a  particular  burden  to  the  com- 
munity. But  the  self-interest  which  so  unhappily  predominates 
even  in  representative  assemblies,  with  the  aid  of  the  courtiers  who 
knew  that  an  excise  increasing  with  the  riches  of  the  country  was 
far  more  desirable  for  the  crown  than  a  fixed  land-tax,  caused  the 
former  to  be  carried,  though  by  the  very  small  majority  of  two 
voices.  Yet  even  thus,  if  the  impoverishment  of  the  gentry,  and 
dilapidation  of  their  estates  through  the  detestable  abuses  of  ward- 
ship was,  as  cannot  be  doubted,  very  mischievous  to  the  inferior 
classes,  the  whole  community  must  be  reckoned  gainers  by  the 
arrangement,  though  it  might  have  been  conducted  in  a  more 
equitable  manner. 

The  statute  12  Car.  II,  c.  24,  takes  away  the  court  of  wards,  with 
all  wardships  and  forfeitures  for  marriage  by  reason  of  tenure,  all 


398  English  Historians 

primer  seizins  and  fines  for  alienation,  aids,  escuages,  homages, 
and  tenures  by  chivalry  without  exception,  save  the  honorary 
services  of  grand  sergeanty,  converting  all  such  tenures  into 
common  socage.  The  same  statute  abolishes  those  famous  rights 
of  purveyance  and  preemption,  the  fruitful  theme  of  so  many  com- 
plaining Parliaments;  and  this  relief  of  the  people  from  a  gen- 
eral burden  may  serve  in  some  measure  as  an  apology  for  the 
imposition  of  the  excise.  This  act  may  be  said  to  have  wrought 
an  important  change  in  the  spirit  of  our  constitution,  by  reducing 
what  is  emphatically  called  the  prerogative  of  the  crown,  and  which, 
by  its  practical  exhibition  in  these  two  vexatious  exercises  of  power, 
wardship  and  purveyance,  kept  up  in  the  minds  of  the  people  a 
more  distinct  perception,  as  well  as  more  awe,  of  the  monarchy, 
than  could  be  felt  in  later  periods,  when  it  has  become,  as  it  were, 
merged  in  the  common  course  of  law,  and  blended  with  the  very 
complex  mechanism  of  our  institutions.  This  great  innovation, 
however,  is  properly  to  be  referred  to  the  revolution  of  1641,  which 
put  an  end  to  the  court  of  star  chamber,  and  suspended  the  feudal 
superiorities.  Hence  with  all  the  misconduct  of  the  two  last 
Stuarts,  and  all  the  tendency  towards  arbitrary  power  that  their 
government  often  displayed,  we  must  perceive  that  the  constitution 
had  put  on,  in  a  very  great  degree,  its  modern  character  during 
that  period ;  the  boundaries  of  prerogative  were  better  understood ; 
its  pretensions,  at  least  in  public,  were  less  enormous ;  and  not  so 
many  violent  and  oppressive,  certainly  not  so  many  illegal,  acts 
were  committed  towards  individuals  as  under  the  two  first  of  their 
family.  • 

§  5.   Disbandment  0}  the  Army 

In  fixing  upon  £1,200,000  as  a  competent  revenue  for  the  crown, 
the  Commons  tacitly  gave  it  to  be  understood  that  a  regular  military 
force  was  not  among  the  necessities  for  which  they  meant  to  provide. 
They  looked  upon  the  army,  notwithstanding  its  recent  services, 
with  that  apprehension  and  jealousy  which  became  an  English 
House  of  Commons.  They  were  still  supporting  it  by  monthly 
assessments  of  £70,000,  and  could  gain  no  relief  by  the  king's 
restoration  till  that  charge  came  to  an  end.  A  bill  therefore  was 
sent  up  to  the  Lords  before  their  adjournment  in  September, 
providing  money  for  disbanding  the  land  forces.  This  was  done 
during  the  recess:  the  soldiers  received  their  arrears  with  many 
fair  words  of  praise,  and  the  nation  saw  itself,  with  delight  and 
thankfulness  to  the  king,  released  from  its  heavy  burdens  and  the 


Restoration  Settlement  in  State  and   Church      399 

dread  of  servitude.  Yet  Charles  had  too  much  knowledge  of 
foreign  countries,  where  monarchy  flourished  in  all  its  plenitude 
of  sovereign  power  under  the  guardian  sword  of  a  standing  army, 
to  part  readily  with  so  favorite  an  instrument  of  kings. 

Some  of  his  counsellors,  and  especially  the  Duke  of  York,  dis- 
suaded him  from  disbanding  the  army,  or  at  least  advised  his 
supplying  its  place  by  another.  The  unsettled  state  of  the  king- 
dom after  so  momentous  a  revolution,  the  dangerous  audacity  of 
the  fanatical  party,  whose  enterprises  were  the  more  to  be  guarded 
against  because  they  were  founded  on  no  such  calculation  as 
reasonable  men  would  form,  and  of  which  the  insurrection  of 
Venner  in  November,  1660,  furnished  an  example,  did  undoubtedly 
appear  a  very  plausible  excuse  for  something  more  of  a  military 
protection  to  the  government  than  yeomen  of  the  guard  and  gen- 
tlemen pensioners.  General  Monk's  regiment,  called  the  Cold- 
stream,  and  one  other  of  horse,  were  accordingly  retained  by 
the  king  in  his  service ;  another  was  formed  out  of  troops  brought 
from  Dunkirk;  and  thus  began,  under  the  name  of  guards,  the 
present  regular  army  of  Great  Britain.  In  1662  these  amounted 
to  about  5000  men  —  a  petty  force  according  to  our  present  notions 
or  to  the  practice  of  other  European  monarchies  in  that  age,  yet 
sufficient  to  establish  an  alarming  precedent,  and  to  open  a  new 
source  of  contention  between  the  supporters  of  power  and  those  of 
freedom. 

So  little  essential  innovation  had  been  effected  by  twenty  years' 
interruption  of  the  regular  government  in  the  common  law  or 
course  of  judicial  proceedings,  that,  when  the  king  and  House  of 
Lords  were  restored  to  their  places,  little  more  seemed  to  be  requisite 
than  a  change  of  names.  But  what  was  true  of  the  State  could  not 
be  applied  to  the  Church.  The  revolution  there  had  gone  much 
further,  and  the  questions  of  restoration  and  compromise  were 
far  more  difficult.  .  .  . 

§  6.   Establishment  of  Anglican  Predominance 

The  new  Parliament  gave  the  first  proofs  of  their  disposition 
by  voting  that  all  their  members  should  receive  the  sacrament  on  a 
certain  day  according  to  the  rites  of  the  Church  of  England,  and 
that  the  solemn  league  and  covenant  should  be  burned  by  the  com- 
mon hangman.  They  excited  still  more  serious  alarm  by  an 
evident  reluctance  to  confirm  the  late  Act  of  Indemnity,  which  the 
king  at  the  opening  of  the  session  had  pressed  upon  their  attention. 


400  English  Historians 

Those  who  had  suffered  the  sequestrations  and  other  losses 
of  a  vanquished  party  could  not  endure  to  abandon  what  they 
reckoned  a  just  reparation.  But  Clarendon  adhered  with  equal 
integrity  and  prudence  to  this  fundamental  principle  of  the  Res- 
toration ;  and  after  a  strong  message  from  the  king  on  the  subject, 
the  Commons  were  content  to  let  the  bill  pass  with  no  new  excep- 
tions. They  gave,  indeed,  some  relief  to  the  ruined  cavaliers  by 
voting  £60,000  to  be  distributed  among  that  class ;  but  so  inade- 
quate a  compensation  did  not  assuage  their  discontent.  .  .  . 

No  time  was  lost,  as  might  be  expected  from  the  temper  of  the 
Commons,  in  replacing  the  throne  on  its  constitutional  basis  after 
the  rude  encroachments  of  the  Long  Parliament.  They  declared 
that  there  was  no  legislative  power  in  either  or  both  houses  without 
the  king ;  that  the  league  and  covenant  was  unlawfully  imposed ; 
that  the  sole  supreme  command  of  the  militia,  and  of  all  forces  by 
sea  and  land,  had  ever  been  by  the  laws  of  England  the  undoubted 
right  of  the  crown ;  that  neither  house  of  parliament  could  pretend 
to  it,  nor  could  lawfully  levy  any  war  offensive  or  defensive  against 
his  Majesty.  These  last  words  appeared  to  go  to  a  dangerous 
length,  and  to  sanction  the  suicidal  doctrine  of  absolute  non- 
resistance.  They  made  the  law  of  high-treason  more  strict  during 
the  king's  life  in  pursuance  of  a  precedent  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth. 
They  restored  the  bishops  to  their  seats  in  the  House  of  Lords  —  a 
step  which  the  last  Parliament  would  never  have  been  induced  to 
take,  but  which  met  with  little  opposition  from  the  present.  The 
violence  that  had  attended  their  exclusion  seemed  a  sufficient 
motive  for  rescinding  a  statute  so  improperly  obtained,  even  if  the 
policy  of  maintaining  the  spiritual  peers  were  somewhat  doubtful. 
The  remembrance  of  those  tumultuous  assemblages  which  had 
overawed  their  predecessors  in  the  winter  of  1641,  and  at  other 
times,  produced  a  law  against  disorderly  petitions.  This  statute 
provides  that  no  petition  or  address  shall  be  presented  to  the  king 
or  either  house  of  Parliament  by  more  than  ten  persons ;  nor  shall 
any  one  procure  above  twenty  persons  to  consent  or  set  their  hands 
to  any  petition  for  alteration  of  matters  established  by  law  in 
Church  or  State,  unless  with  the  previous  order  of  three  justices 
of  the  county,  or  the  major  part  of  the  grand  jury. 

Thus  far  the  new  Parliament  might  be  said  to  have  acted  chiefly 
on  a  principle  of  repairing  the  breaches  recently  made  in  our  con- 
stitution, and  of  reestablishing  the  just  boundaries  of  the  executive 
power;  nor  would  much  objection  have  been  offered  to  their 
measures  had  they  gone  no  farther  in  the  same  course.  The  act 


Restoration  Settlement  in  State  and  Church      401 

for  regulating  corporations  is  much  more  questionable,  and  dis- 
played a  determination  to  exclude  a  considerable  portion  of  the 
community  from  their  civil  rights.  It  enjoined  all  magistrates 
and  persons  bearing  offices  of  trust  in  corporations  to  swear  that 
they  believed  it  unlawful,  on  any  pretence  whatever,  to  take  arms 
against  the  king,  and  that  they  abhorred  the  traitorous  position 
of  bearing  arms  by  his  authority  against  his  person,  or  against 
those  that  are  commissioned  by  him.  They  were  also  to  renounce 
all  obligation  arising  out  of  the  oath  called  the  solemn  league  and 
covenant ;  in  case  of  refusal  to  be  immediately  removed  from  office. 
Those  elected  in  future  were,  in  addition  to  the  same  oaths,  to  have 
received  the  sacrament  within  one  year  before  their  election  ac- 
cording to  the  rights  of  the  English  Church.  These  provisions 
struck  at  the  heart  of  the  Presbyterian  party  whose  strength  lay  in 
the  little  oligarchies  of  corporate  towns,  which  directly  or  indirectly 
returned  to  Parliament  a  very  large  proportion  of  its  members. 
Yet  it  rarely  happens  that  a  political  faction  is  crushed  by  the 
terrors  of  an  oath.  Many  of  the  more  rigid  Presbyterians  refused 
the  conditions  imposed  by  this  act;  but  the  majority  found  pre- 
texts for  qualifying  themselves.  .  .  . 

A  determination  having  been  taken  to  admit  of  no  extensive 
comprehension  in  religious  matters,  it  was  debated  by  the  gov- 
ernment whether  to  make  a  few  alterations  in  the  Liturgy,  or  to 
restore  the  ancient  service  in  every  particular.  The  former 
advice  prevailed,  though  with  no  desire  or  expectation  of  concil- 
iating any  scrupulous  persons  by  the  amendments  introduced. 
These  were  by  no  means  numerous,  and  in  some  instances  rather 
chosen  in  order  to  irritate  and  mock  the  opposite  party  than  from 
any  compliance  with  their  prejudices.  It  is  indeed  very  probable 
from  the  temper  of  the  new  Parliament  that  they  would  not  have 
come  into  more  tolerant  and  healing  measures.  When  the  Act 
of  Uniformity  was  brought  into  the  House  of  Lords,  it  was  found  not 
only  to  restore  all  the  ceremonies  and  other  matters  to  which 
objection  had  been  taken,  but  to  contain  fresh  clauses  more  in- 
tolerable than  the  rest  to  the  Presbyterian  clergy.  One  of  these 
enacted  that  not  only  every  beneficed  minister,  but  fellow  of  a 
college,  or  even  schoolmaster,  should  declare  his  unfeigned  assent 
and  consent  to  all  and  everything  contained  in  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer.  These  words,  however  capable  of  being  eluded  and 
explained  away,  as  such  subscriptions  always  are,  seemed  to 
amount,  in  common  use  of  language,  to  a  complete  approbation 
of.  an  entire  volume,  such  as  a  man  of  sense  hardly  gives  to  any 


402  English   Historians 

book,  and  which,  at  a  time  when  scrupulous  persons  were  with 
great  difficulty  endeavoring  to  reconcile  themselves  to  submission, 
placed  a  new  stumbling-block  in  their  way,  which,  without  aban- 
doning their  integrity,  they  found  it  impossible  to  surmount.  .  .  . 

§  7.   Expulsion  of  Non-conforming  Parsons 

The  new  Act  of  Uniformity  succeeded  to  the  utmost  wishes  of  its 
promoters.  It  provided  that  every  minister  should,  before  the 
feast  of  St.  Bartholomew,  1662,  publicly  declare  his  assent  and  con- 
sent to  everything  contained  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  on 
pain  of  being  ipso  facto  deprived  of  his  benefice.  When  the  day 
of  St.  Bartholomew  came,  about  two  thousand  persons  resigned  their 
preferments  rather  than  stain  their  consciences  by  compliance  —  an 
act  to  which  the  more  liberal  Anglicans,  after  the  bitterness  of 
immediate  passions  had  passed  away,  have  accorded  that  praise 
which  is  due  to  heroic  virtue  in  an  enemy.  It  may  justly  be  said 
that  the  Episcopal  clergy  had  set  an  example  of  similar  magnanimity 
in  refusing  to  take  the  covenant.  Yet,  as  that  was  partly  of  a 
political  nature,  and  those  who  were  ejected  for  not  taking  it 
might  hope  to  be  restored  through  the  success  of  the  king's  arms, 
I  do  not  know  that  it  was  altogether  so  eminent  an  act  of  self- 
devotion  as  the  Presbyterian  clergy  displayed  on  St.  Bartholomew's 
day.  Both  of  them  afford  striking  contrasts  to  the  pliancy  of 
the  English  Church  in  the  greater  question  of  the  preceding  century, 
and  bear  witness  to  a  remarkable  integrity  and  consistency  of 
principle.  .  .  . 

Some  had  believed,  among  whom  Clarendon  seems  to  have  been, 
that  all  scruples  of  tender  conscience  in  the  Presbyterian  clergy  being 
faction  and  hypocrisy,  they  would  submit  very  quietly  to  the  law, 
when  they  found  all  their  clamor  unavailing  to  obtain  a  dispen- 
sation from  it.  The  resignation  of  two  thousand  beneficed  ministers 
at  once,  instead  of  extorting  praise,  rather  inflamed  the  resentment 
of  their  bigoted  enemies,  especially  when  they  perceived  that  a 
public  and  perpetual  toleration  of  separate  worship  was  favored 
by  part  of  the  court.  Rumors  of  conspiracies  and  insurrections, 
sometimes  false,  but  gaining  credit  from  the  notorious  discontent 
both  of  the  old  Commonwealth's  party,  and  of  many  who  had  never 
been  on  that  side,  were  sedulously  propagated,  in  order  to  keep  up 
the  animosity  of  Parliament  against  the  ejected  clergy ;  and  these 
are  recited  as  the  pretext  of  an  act  passed  in  1664  for  suppressing 
seditious  conventicles  (the  epithet  being  in  this  place  wantonly 


Restoration  Settlement  in  State  and  Church      403 

and  unjustly  insulting),  which  inflicted  on  all  persons  above  the  age 
of  sixteen,  present  at  any  religious  meeting  in  any  other  manner 
than  is  allowed  by  the  practice  of  the  Church  of  England,  where 
five  or  more  persons  besides  the  household  should  be  present,  a 
penalty  of  three  months'  imprisonment  for  the  first  offence,  of 
six  for  the  second,  and  of  seven  years'  transportation  for  the  third, 
on  conviction  before  a  single  justice  of  the  peace.  This  act,  says 
Clarendon,  if  it  had  been  vigorously  executed,  would  no  doubt  have 
produced  a  thorough  reformation.  Such  is  ever  the  language 
of  the  supporters  of  tyranny;  when  oppression  does  not  succeed, 
it  is  because  there  has  been  too  little  of  it.  But  those  who  suffered 
under  this  statute  report  very  differently  as  to  its  vigorous  execu- 
tion. The  jails  were  filled  not  only  with  ministers  who  had  borne 
the  brunt  of  former  persecutions,  but  with  the  laity  who  attended 
them ;  and  the  hardship  was  the  more  grievous  that,  the  act  being 
ambiguously  worded,  its  construction  was  left  to  a  single  magis- 
trate, generally  very  adverse  to  the  accused. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Ranke,  History  of  England,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  311  ff.  Masson,  Life  of  Mil- 
ton, Vol.  VI.  Burnet,  My  Own  Time,  a  charming  work  by  a  contemporary. 
Abbott,  The  Long  Parliament  of  Charles  II,  in  the  English  Historical 
Review,  January  and  April,  1906.  For  the  important  documents,  Robertson, 
Select  Statutes,  Cases,  and  Documents. 


CHAPTER   VIII 

JAMES   H   AND    THE    CATHOLIC   REACTION 

CHARLES  II,  though  Catholic  at  heart  and  a  firm  believer  in 
absolutism,  as  far  as  he  was  capable  of  any  convictions,  was  deter- 
mined not  to  lose  his  throne  as  his  father  had  done.  James  II, 
however,  did  not  possess  the  qualities  of  indifference  and  compro- 
mise which  characterized  his  brother.  He  was  not  only  Catholic, 
but  he  wanted  to  see  the  English  nation  converted  to  his  faith. 
He  was  determined  to  allow  no  obstacle  to  prevent  the  realization 
of  his  cherished  plans.  He  therefore  took  advantage  of  many 
points  on  which  the  royal  power  was  not  explicitly  defined,  and 
resorted  to  measures  which  really  violated  the  spirit  if  not  the  letter 
of  the  law  and  custom  of  the  constitution.  The  result  was  the 
awakening  of  an  opposition  which  expelled  him  from  his  throne. 
The  most  brilliant  account  of  this  Revolution  of  1688  is  by  the 
great  Whig  historian  Macaulay,  whose  sympathies  with  the  cause 
of  the  Revolution  gave  him  a  remarkable  insight  into  the  views  of 
the  leaders,  but  prevented  his  doing  justice  to  both  parties. 

§i.    Undefined  Royal  Prerogatives1 

From  his  predecessors  James  had  inherited  two  prerogatives, 
of  which  the  limits  had  never  been  defined  with  strict  accuracy,  and 
which,  if  exerted  without  any  limit,  would  of  themselves  have 
sufficed  to  overturn  the  whole  polity  of  the  State  and  of  the 
Church.  These  were  the  dispensing  power  and  the  ecclesiastical 
supremacy.  By  means  of  the  dispensing  power,  the  king  pur- 
posed to  admit  Roman  Catholics,  not  merely  to  civil  and  military, 
but  to  spiritual,  offices.  By  means  of  the  ecclesiastical  supremacy 
he  hoped  to  make  the  Anglican  clergy  his  instruments  for  the 
destruction  of  their  own  religion. 

1  Macaulay,  History  of  England,  chaps.  vS-viii. 
404 


James  II  and  the  Catholic  Reaction         405 

This  scheme  developed  itself  by  degrees.  It  was  not  thought 
safe  to  begin  by  granting  to  the  whole  Roman  Catholic  body  a 
dispensation  from  all  statutes  imposing  penalties  and  tests.  For 
nothing  was  more  fully  established  than  that  such  a  dispensation 
was  illegal.  The  Cabal  had,  in  1672,  put  forth  a  general  Declar- 
ation of  Indulgence.  The  Commons,  as  soon  as  they  met,  had 
protested  against  it.  Charles  the  Second  had  ordered  it  to  be  can- 
celled in  his  presence,  and  had,  both  by  his  own  mouth  and  by 
a  written  message,  assured  the  houses  that  the  step  which  had 
caused  so  much  complaint  should  never  be  drawn  into  precedent. 
It  would  have  been  difficult  to  find  in  all  the  Inns  of  Court  a 
barrister  of  reputation  to  argue  in  defence  of  a  prerogative  which 
the  sovereign,  seated  on  his  throne  in  full  Parliament,  had  sol- 
emnly renounced  a  few  years  before.  But  it  was  not  quite  so  clear 
that  the  king  might  not,  on  special  grounds,  grant  exemptions  to 
individuals  by  name.  The  first  object  of  James,  therefore,  was 
to  obtain  from  the  courts  of  common  law  an  acknowledgment  that, 
to  this  extent  at  least,  he  possessed  the  dispensing  power. 

§  2.   Coercion  of  the  Courts 

But  though  his  pretensions  were  moderate  when  compared 
with  those  which  he  put  forth  a  few  months  later,  he  soon  found 
that  he  had  against  him  almost  the  whole  sense  of  Westminster 
Hall.  Four  of  the  judges  gave  him  to  understand  that  they 
could  not,  on  this  occasion,  serve  his  purpose ;  and  it  is  remarkable 
that  all  the  four  were  violent  Tories,  and  that  among  them  were 
men  who  had  accompanied  Jeffreys  on  the  Bloody  Circuit,  and 
who  had  been  consenting  to  the  death  of  Cornish  and  of  Elizabeth 
Gaunt.  Jones,  the  Chief- Justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  a  man 
who  had  never  before  shrunk  from  any  drudgery,  however  cruel 
or  servile,  now  held  in  the  royal  closet  language  which  might 
have  become  the  lips  of  the  purest  magistrates  in  our  history.  He 
was  plainly  told  that  he  must  either  give  up  his  opinion  or  his  place. 
"For  my  place,"  he  answered,  "I  care  little.  I  am  old  and  worn 
out  in  the  service  of  the  crown;  but  I  am  mortified  to  find  that 
your  Majesty  thinks  me  capable  of  giving  a  judgment  which  none 
but  an  ignorant  or  a  dishonest  man  could  give."  "I  am  deter- 
mined," said  the  king,  "to  have  twelve  judges  who  will  be  all  of 
my  mind  as  to  this  matter."  "Your  Majesty,"  answered  Jones 
"may  find  twelve  judges  of  your  mind,  but  hardly  twelve  lawyers." 
He  was  dismissed,  together  with  Montague,  Chief  Baron  of  the 


406  English  Historians 

Exchequer,  and  two  puisne  judges,  Neville  and  Charlton.  One 
of  the  new  judges  was  Christopher  Milton,  younger  brother  of 
the  great  poet.  Of  Christopher  little  is  known,  except  that  in  the 
time  of  the  Civil  War  he  had  been  a  Royalist,  and  that  he  now,  in 
his  old  age,  leaned  towards  popery.  It  does  not  appear  that  he 
was  ever  formally  reconciled  to  the  Church  of  Rome;  but  he 
certainly  had  scruples  about  communicating  with  the  Church  of 
England,  and  had  therefore  a  strong  interest  in  supporting  the 
dispensing  power. 

The  king  found  his  counsel  as  refractory  as  his  judges.  The 
first  barrister  who  learned  that  he  was  expected  to  defend  the 
dispensing  power  was  the  solicitor-general,  Heneage  Finch.  He 
peremptorily  refused,  and  was  turned  out  of  office  on  the  following 
day.  The  attorney-general,  Sawyer,  was  ordered  to  draw  war- 
rants authorizing  members  of  the  Church  of  Rome  to  hold  bene- 
fices belonging  to  the  Church  of  England.  Sawyer  had  been 
deeply  concerned  in  some  of  the  harshest  and  most  unjustifiable 
prosecutions  of  that  age,  and  the  Whigs  abhorred  him  as  a  man 
stained  with  the  blood  of  Russell  and  Sidney;  but  on  this  occasion 
he  showed  no  want  of  honesty  or  of  resolution.  "Sir,"  said  he, 
"this  is  not  merely  to  dispense  with  a  statute;  it  is  to  annul  the 
whole  statute  law  from  the  accession  of  Elizabeth  to  the  present 
day.  I  dare  not  do  it,  and  I  implore  your  Majesty  to  consider 
whether  such  an  attack  upon  the  rights  of  the  Church  be  in  accord- 
ance with  your  late  gracious  promises."  Sawyer  would  have 
been  instantly  dismissed,  as  Finch  had  been,  if  the  government 
could  have  found  a  successor ;  but  this  was  no  easy  matter.  It  was 
necessary,  for  the  protection  of  the  rights  of  the  crown,  that  one 
at  least  of  the  crown  lawyers  should  be  a  man  of  learning,  ability, 
and  experience,  and  no  such  man  was  willing  to  defend  the  dis- 
pensing power.  The  attorney-general  was  therefore  permitted 
to  retain  his  place  during  some  months.  Thomas  Powis,  an 
obscure  barrister  who  had  no  qualification  for  high  employment 
except  servility,  was  appointed  solicitor. 

§  3.    The  Hales  Case  and  Public  Employment  of  Catholics 

The  preliminary  arrangements  were  now  complete.  There 
was  a  solicitor-general  to  argue  for  the  dispensing  power,  and  a 
bench  of  judges  to  decide  in  favor  of  it.  The  question  was  there- 
fore speedily  brought  to  a  hearing.  Sir  Edward  Hales,  a  gentleman 
of  Kent,  had  been  converted  to  popery  in  days  when  it  was  not  safe 


James  II  and  the  Catholic  Reaction        407 

for  any  man  of  note  openly  to  declare  himself  a  Papist.  He  had 
kept  his  secret,  and,  when  questioned,  had  affirmed  that  he  was  a 
Protestant  with  a  solemnity  which  did  little  credit  to  his  principles. 
When  James  had  ascended  the  throne,  disguise  was  no  longer 
necessary.  Sir  Edward  publicly  apostatized,  and  was  rewarded 
with  the  command  of  a  regiment  of  foot.  He  had  held  his  com- 
mission more  than  three  months  without  taking  the  sacrament. 
He  was  therefore  liable  to  a  penalty  of  five  hundred  pounds,  which 
an  informer  might  recover  by  action  of  debt.  A  menial  servant 
was  employed  to  bring  a  suit  for  this  sum  in  the  Court  of  King's 
Bench.  Sir  Edward  did  not  dispute  the  facts  alleged  against  him, 
but  pleaded  that  he  had  letters-patent  authorizing  him  to  hold  his 
commission  notwithstanding  the  Test  Act.  The  plaintiff  demurred, 
that  is  to  say,  admitted  Sir  Edward's  plea  to  be  true  in  fact,  but 
denied  that  it  was  a  sufficient  answer.  Thus  was  raised  a  simple 
issue  of  law  to  be  decided  by  the  court.  A  barrister,  who  was 
notoriously  a  tool  of  the  government,  appeared  for  the  mock 
plaintiff  and  made  some  feeble  objections  to  the  defendent's  plea. 
The  new  solicitor-general  replied.  The  attorney-general  took 
no  part  in  the  proceedings.  Judgment  was  given  by  the  Lord 
Chief-Justice,  Sir  Edward  Herbert.  He  announced  that  he  had 
submitted  the  question  to  all  the  twelve  judges,  and  that,  in  the 
opinion  of  eleven  of  them,  the  king  might  lawfully  dispense  with 
penal  statutes  in  particular  cases,  and  for  special  reasons  of  grave, 
importance.  The  single  dissentient,  Baron  Street,  was  not  re- 
moved from  his  place.  He  was  a  man  of  morals  so  bad  that  his 
own  relations  shrank  from  him,  and  that  the  Prince  of  Orange, 
at  the  time  of  the  Revolution,  was  advised  not  to  see  him.  The 
character  of  Street  makes  it  impossible  to  believe  that  he  would 
have  been  more  scrupulous  than  his  brethren.  The  character 
of  James  makes  it  impossible  to  believe  that  a  refractory  Baron 
of  the  Exchequer  would  have  been  permitted  to  retain  his  post. 
There  can,  therefore,  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  dissenting 
judge  was,  like  the  plaintiff  and  the  plaintiff's  council,  acting 
collusively.  It  was  important  that  there  should  be  a  great  pre- 
ponderance of  authority  in  favor  of  the  dispensing  power;  yet  it 
was  important  that  the  bench,  which  had  been  carefully  packed 
for  the  occasion,  should  appear  to  be  independent.  One  judge, 
therefore,  the  least  respectable  of  the  twelve,  was  permitted,  or 
more  probably  commanded,  to  give  his  voice  against  the  pre- 
rogative. 

The  power  which  the  courts  of  law  had  thus  recognized  was 


408  English  Historians 

not  suffered  to  lie  idle.  Within  a  month  after  the  decision  of  the 
King's  Bench  had  been  pronounced  four  Roman  Catholic  Lords 
were  sworn  of  the  Privy  Council.  Two  of  them,  Powis  and  Bel- 
lasyse,  were  of  the  Moderate  party,  and  probably  took  their  seats 
with  reluctance  and  with  many  sad  forebodings.  The  other  two, 
Arundell  and  Dover,  had  no  such  misgivings.  .  .  . 

§  4.  Rapid  Development  of  Catholicism 

The  temper  of  the  nation  was  indeed  such  as  might  well  make 
the  king  hesitate.  During  some  months  discontent  had  been 
steadily  and  rapidly  increasing.  The  celebration  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  worship  had  long  been  prohibited  by  act  of  Parliament. 
During  several  generations  no  Roman  Catholic  clergyman  had 
dared  to  exhibit  himself  in  any  public  place  with  the  badges  of 
his  office.  Against  the  regular  clergy,  and  against  the  restless  and 
subtle  Jesuits  by  name,  had  been  enacted  a  succession  of  rigorous 
statutes.  Every  Jesuit  who  set  foot  in  this  country  was  liable  to 
be  hanged,  drawn,  and  quartered.  A  reward  was  offered  for  his 
detection.  He  was  not  allowed  to  take  advantage  of  the  general 
rule,  that  men  are  not  bound  to  accuse  themselves.  Whoever 
was  suspected  of  being  a  Jesuit  might  be  interrogated,  and,  if  he 
refused  to  answer,  might  be  sent  to  prison  for  life.  These  laws, 
.though  they  had  not,  except  when  there  was  supposed  to  be  some 
peculiar  danger,  been  strictly  executed,  and  though  they  had  never 
prevented  Jesuits  from  resorting  to  England,  had  made  disguise 
necessary. 

But  all  disguise  was  now  thrown  off.  Injudicious  members 
of  the  king's  Church,  encouraged  by  him,  took  a  pride  in  defying 
statutes  which  were  still  of  undoubted  validity,  and  feelings  which 
had  a  stronger  hold  of  the  national  mind  than  at  any  former 
period.  Roman  Catholic  chapels  rose  all  over  the  country. 
Cowls,  girdles  of  ropes,  and  strings  of  beads  constantly  appeared 
in  the  streets,  and  astonished  a  population,  the  oldest  of  whom 
had  never  seen  a  conventual  garb  except  on  the  stage.  A  convent 
arose  at  Clerkenwell,  on  the  site  of  the  ancient  cloister  of  St. 
John.  The  Franciscans  occupied  a  mansion  in  Lincoln's  Inn 
Fields.  The  Carmelites  were  quartered  in  the  city.  A  society 
of  Benedictine  monks  was  lodged  in  St.  James'r  Palace.  In  the 
Savoy  a  spacious  house,  including  a  church  and  a  school,  was  built 
for  the  Jesuits.  The  skill  and  care  with  which  those  fathers  had, 
during  several  generations,  conducted  the  education  of  youth,  had 


James  II  and  the  Catholic  Reaction        409 

drawn  forth  reluctant  praises  from  the  wisest  Protestants.  Bacon 
had  pronounced  the  mode  of  instruction  followed  in  the  Jesuit 
colleges  to  be  the  best  yet  known  in  the  world,  and  had  warmly 
expressed  his  regret  that  so  admirable  a  system  of  intellectual 
and  moral  discipline  should  be  employed  on  the  side  of  error. 
It  was  not  improbable  that  the  new  academy  in  the  Savoy  might, 
under  royal  patronage,  prove  a  formidable  rival  to  the  great  foun- 
dations of  Eton,  Westminster,  and  Winchester.  Indeed,  soon 
after  the  school  was  opened,  the  classes  consisted  of  four  hundred 
boys,  about  one-half  of  whom  were  Protestants.  The  Protestant 
pupils  were  not  required  to  attend  mass;  but  there  could  be  no 
doubt  that  the  influence  of  able  preceptors,  devoted  to  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  and  versed  in  all  the  arts  which  win  the  con- 
fidence and  affection  of  youth,  would  make  many  converts. 

These  things  produced  great  excitement  among  the  populace, 
which  is  always  more  moved  by  what  impresses  the  senses  than  by 
what  is  addressed  to  the  reason.  Thousands  of  rude  and  ignorant 
men,  to  whom  the  dispensing  power  and  the  Ecclesiastical  Com- 
mission were  words  without  a  meaning,  saw  with  dismay  and 
indignation  a  Jesuit  college  rising  on  the  banks  of  the  Thames, 
friars  in  hoods  and  gowns  walking  in  the  Strand,  and  crowds  of 
devotees  pressing  in  at  the  doors  of  temples  where  homage  was 
paid  to  graven  images.  Riots  broke  out  in  several  parts  of  the 
country.  At  Coventry  and  Worcester  the  Roman  Catholic  wor- 
ship was  violently  interrupted.  At  Bristol  the  rabble,  counte- 
nanced, it  was  said,  by  the  magistrates,  exhibited  a  profane  and 
indecent  pageant,  in  which  the  Virgin  Mary  was  represented  by  a 
buffoon,  and  in  which  a  mock  host  was  carried  in  procession. 
Soldiers  were  called  out  to  disperse  the  mob.  The  mob,  then  and 
ever  since  one  of  the  fiercest  in  the  kingdom,  resisted.  Blows 
were  exchanged,  and  serious  hurts  inflicted.  The  agitation  was 
great  in  the  capital,  and  greater  in  the  city,  properly  so  called, 
than  at  Westminster.  For  the  people  of  Westminster  had  been 
accustomed  to  see  among  them  the  private  chapels  of  Roman 
Catholic  ambassadors;  but  the  city  had  not,  within  living  mem- 
ory, been  polluted  by  any  idolatrous  exhibition.  Now,  how- 
ever, the  resident  of  the  Elector  Palatine,  encouraged  by  the  king, 
fitted  up  a  chapel  in  Lime  Street. 

The  heads  of  the  corporation,  though  men  selected  for  office 
on  account  of  their  known  Toryism,  protested  against  this  pro- 
ceeding, which,  as  they  said,  the  ablest  gentlemen  of  the  long  robe 
regarded  as  illegal.  The  Lord  Mayor  was  ordered  to  appear 


4io  English  Historians 

before  the  Privy  Council.  "Take  heed  what  you  do,"  said  the 
king;  "obey  me,  and  do  not  trouble  yourself  either  about  gentle- 
men of  the  long  robe  or  gentlemen  of  the  short  robe."  The  Chan- 
cellor took  up  the  word,  and  reprimanded  the  unfortunate  magis- 
trate with  the  genuine  eloquence  of  the  Old  Bailey  bar.  The 
chapel  was  opened.  All  the  neighborhood  was  soon  in  commotion. 
Great  crowds  assembled  in  Cheapside  to  attack  the  new  mass 
house.  The  priests  were  insulted.  A  crucifix  was  taken  out  of 
the  building  and  set  up  on  the  parish  pump.  The  Lord  Mayor 
came  to  quell  the  tumult,  but  was  received  with  cries  of  "No 
wooden  gods."  The  train-bands  were  ordered  to  disperse  the 
crowd;  but  the  train-bands  shared  in  the  popular  feeling,  and 
murmurs  were  heard  from  the  ranks,  "We  cannot  in  conscience 
fight  for  popery."  .  .  . 

§  5.    The  Second  Declaration  of  Indulgence 

On  the  twenty-seventh  of  April,  1688,  the  king  put  forth  a 
second  Declaration  of  Indulgence.  In  this  paper  he  recited  at 
length  the  Declaration  of  the  preceding  April.  His  past  life,  he 
said,  ought  to  have  convinced  his  people  that  he  was  not  a  person 
who  could  easily  be  induced  to  depart  from  any  resolution  which 
he  had  formed.  But,  as  designing  men  had  attempted  to  persuade 
the  world  that  he  might  be  prevailed  on  to  give  way  in  this  matter, 
he  thought  it  necessary  to  proclaim  that  his  purpose  was  im- 
mutably fixed,  that  he  was  resolved  to  employ  those  only  who  were 
prepared  to  concur  in  his  design,  and  that  he  had,  in  pursuance 
of  that  resolution,  dismissed  many  of  his  disobedient  servants 
from  civil  and  military  employments.  He  announced  that  he 
meant  to  hold  a  Parliament  in  November  at  the  latest;  and  he 
exhorted  his  subjects  to  choose  representatives  who  would  assist 
him  in  the  great  work  which  he  had  undertaken. 

This  Declaration  at  first  produced  little  sensation.  It  contained 
nothing  new;  and  men  wondered  that  the  king  should  think  it 
worth  while  to  publish  a  solemn  manifesto  merely  for  the  purpose 
of  telling  them  that  he  had  not  changed  his  mind.  Perhaps  James 
was  nettled  by  the  indifference  with  which  the  announcement  of  his 
fixed  resolution  was  received  by  the  public,  and  thought  that  his 
dignity  and  authority  would  suffer  unless  he  without  delay  did 
something  novel  and  striking.  On  the  fourth  of  May,  accordingly, 
he  made  an  order  in  council  that  his  Declaration  of  the  preceding 
week  should  be  read,  on  two  successive  Sundays,  at  the  time  of 


James  II  and  the  Catholic  Reaction         411 

divine  service,  by  the  officiating  ministers  of  all  the  churches  and 
chapels  of  the  kingdom.  In  London  and  in  the  suburbs  the 
reading  was  to  take  place  on  the  twentieth  and  twenty-seventh  of 
May,  in  other  parts  of  England  on  the  third  and  tenth  of  June.  The 
bishops  were  directed  to  distribute  copies  of  the  Declaration 
through  their  respective  dioceses.  .  .  . 

The  king's  temper  was  arbitrary  and  severe.  The  proceedings 
of  the  Ecclesiastical  Commission  were  as  summary  as  those  of  a 
court-martial.  Whoever  ventured  to  resist  might  in  a  week  be 
ejected  from  his  parsonage,  deprived  of  his  whole  income,  pro- 
nounced incapable  of  holding  any  other  spiritual  preferment,  and 
left  to  beg  from  door  to  door.  If,  indeed,  the  whole  body  offered 
a  united  opposition  to  the  royal  will,  it  was  probable  that  even 
James  would  scarcely  venture  to  punish  ten  thousand  delinquents 
at  once. 

But  there  was  not  time  to  form  an  extensive  combination. 
The  order  in  Council  was  gazetted  on  the  seventh  of  May.  On 
the  twentieth  the  Declaration  was  to  be  read  in  all  the  pulpits  of 
London  and  the  neighborhood.  By  no  exertion  was  it  possible 
in  that  age  to  ascertain  within  a  fortnight  the  intentions  of  one- 
tenth  part  of  the  parochial  ministers  who  were  scattered  over  the 
kingdom.  It  was  not  easy  to  collect  in  so  short  a  time  the  sense 
even  of  the  episcopal  order.  It  might  also  well  be  apprehended 
that,  if  the  clergy  refused  to  read  the  Declaration,  the  Protestant 
Dissenters  would  misinterpret  the  refusal,  would  despair  of  obtain- 
ing any  toleration  from  the  members  of  the  Church  of  England, 
and  would  throw  their  whole  weight  into  the  scale  of  the  court.  .  .  . 

At  this  conjuncture  the  Protestant  Dissenters  of  London  won 
for  themselves  a  title  to  the  lasting  gratitude  of  their  country. 
They  had  hitherto  been  reckoned  by  the  government  as  part  of  its 
strength.  A  few  of  their  most  active  and  noisy  preachers,  cor- 
rupted by  the  favors  of  the  court,  had  got  up  addresses  in  favor 
of  the  King's  policy.  Others,  estranged  by  the  recollection  of  many 
cruel  wrongs  both  from  the  Church  of  England  and  from  the 
House  of  Stuart,  had  seen  with  resentful  pleasure  the  tyrannical 
prince  and  the  tyrannical  hierarchy  separated  by  a  bitter  enmity, 
and  bidding  against  each  other  for  the  help  of  sects  lately  perse- 
cuted and  despised.  But  this  feeling,  however  natural,  had  been 
indulged  long  enough. 

The  time  liad  come  when  it  was  necessary  to  make  a  choice; 
and  the  Non-conformists  of  the  city,  with  a  noble  spirit,  arrayed 
themselves  side  by  side  with  the  members  of  the  Church  in  defence 


412  English  Historians 

of  the  fundamental  laws  of  the  realm.  Baxter,  Bates,  and  Howe 
distinguished  themselves  by  their  efforts  to  bring  about  this  coa- 
lition; but  the  generous  enthusiasm  which  pervaded  the  whole 
Puritan  body  made  the  task  easy.  The  zeal  of  the  flocks  outran 
that  of  the  pastors.  Those  Presbyterian  and  Independent  teachers 
who  showed  an  inclination  to  take  part  with  the  king  against  the 
ecclesiastical  establishment  received  distinct  notice  that,  unless 
they  changed  their  conduct,  their  congregations  would  neither 
hear  them  nor  pay  them.  Alsop,  who  had  flattered  himself  that  he 
should  be  able  to  bring  over  a  great  body  of  his  disciples  to  the 
royal  side,  found  himself  on  a  sudden  an  object  of  contempt  and 
abhorrence  to  those  who  had  lately  revered  him  as  their  spiritual 
guide,  sank  into  a  deep  melancholy,  and  hid  himself  from  the  public 
eye.  Deputations  waited  on  several  of  the  London  clergy,  implor- 
ing them  not  to  judge  of  the  dissenting  body  from  the  servile  adu- 
lation which  had  lately  filled  the  London  Gazette,  and  exhorting 
them,  placed  as  they  were  in  the  van  of  this  great  fight,  to  play  the 
men  for  the  liberties  of  England  and  for  the  faith  delivered  to  the 
saints.  These  assurances  were  received  with  joy  and  gratitude. 
Yet  there  was  still  much  anxiety  and  much  difference  of  opinion 
among  those  who  had  to  decide  whether,  on  Sunday  the  twentieth, 
they  would  or  would  not  obey  the  king's  command.  The  London 
clergy,  then  universally  acknowledged  to  be  the  flower  of  their 
profession,  held  a  meeting.  Fifteen  doctors  of  divinity  were 
present.  .  .  . 

The  general  feeling  of  the  assembly  seemed  to  be  that  it  was,  on 
the  whole,  advisable  to  obey  the  Order  in  Council.  The  dispute 
began  to  wax  warm,  and  might  have  produced  fatal  consequences, 
if  it  had  not  been  brought  to  a  close  by  the  firmness  and  wisdom 
of  Doctor  Edward  Fowler,  Vicar  of  Saint  Giles's,  Cripplegate, 
one  of  a  small  but  remarkable  class  of  divines  who  united  that 
love  of  civil  liberty  which  belonged  to  the  school  of  Calvin  with  the 
theology  of  the  school  of  Arminius.  Standing  up,  Fowler  spoke 
thus:  " I  must  be  plain.  The  question  is  so  simple  that  argument 
can  throw  no  new  light  on  it,  and  can  only  beget  heat.  Let  every 
man  say  Yes  or  No.  But  I  cannot  consent  to  be  bound  by  the  vote 
of  the  majority.  I  shall  be  sorry  to  cause  a  breach  of  unity.  But 
this  Declaration  I  cannot  in  conscience  read."  Tillotson,  Patrick, 
Sherlock,  and  Stillingfleet  declared  that  they  were  of  the  same  mind. 
The  majority  yielded  to  the  authority  of  a  minority  so  respectable. 
A  resolution  by  which  all  present  pledged  themselves  to  one  another 
not  to  read  the  Declaration  was  then  drawn  up.  Patrick  was  the 


James  II  and  the  Catholic  Reaction        413 

first  who  set  his  hand  to  it;  Fowler  was  the  second.  The  paper 
was  sent  round  the  city,  and  was  speedily  subscribed  by  eighty-five 
incumbents. 

§  6.   The  Protest  of  the  Bishops 

Meanwhile  several  of  the  bishops  were  anxiously  deliberating 
as  to  the  course  which  they  should  take.  On  the  twelfth  of  May 
a  grave  and  learned  company  was  assembled  round  the  table  of 
the  primate  at  Lambeth.  Compton,  Bishop  of  London,  Turner, 
Bishop  of  Ely,  White,  Bishop  of  Peterborough,  and  Tenison, 
Rector  of  Saint  Martin's  Parish,  were  among  the  guests.  .  .  . 
The  general  opinion  was  that  the  Declaration  ought  not  to  be  read. 
Letters  were  forthwith  written  to  several  of  the  most  respectable 
prelates  of  the  province  of  Canterbury,  entreating  them  to  come 
up  without  delay  to  London,  and  to  strengthen  the  hands  of  their 
metropolitan  at  this  conjuncture.  As  there  was  little  doubt  that 
these  letters  would  be  opened  if  they  passed  through  the  office 
in  Lombard  Street,  they  were  sent  by  horsemen  to  the  nearest 
country  post-towns  on  the  different  roads.  The  Bishop  of  Win- 
chester, whose  loyalty  had  been  so  signally  proved  at  Sedgemoor, 
though  suffering  from  indisposition,  resolved  to  set  out  in  obe- 
dience to  the  summons,  but  found  himself  unable  to  bear  the  motion 
of  a  coach.  The  letter  addressed  to  William  Lloyd,  Bishop  of 
Norwich,  was,  in  spite  of  all  precautions,  detained  by  a  postmaster; 
and  that  prelate,  inferior  to  none  of  his  brethren  in  courage  and 
zeal  for  the  common  cause  of  his  order,  did  not  reach  London  in 
time.  His  namesake,  William  Lloyd,  Bishop  of  Saint  Asaph,  a 
pious,  honest,  and  learned  man,  but  of  slender  judgment,  and  half 
crazed  by  his  persevering  endeavors  to  extract  from  the  Book  of 
Daniel  and  from  the  Revelation  some  information  about  the  Pope 
and  the  king  of  France,  hastened  to  the  capital,  and  arrived  on  the 
sixteenth.  On  the  following  day  came  the  excellent  Ken,  Bishop 
of  Bath  and  Wells,  Lake,  Bishop  of  Chichester,  and  Sir  John 
Trelawney,  Bishop  of  Bristol,  a  baronet  of  an  old  and  honorable 
Cornish  family. 

On  the  eighteenth  a  meeting  of  prelates  and  of  other  eminent 
divines  was  held  at  Lambeth.  Tillotson,  Tenison,  Stillingfleet, 
Patrick,  and  Sherlock  were  present.  Prayers  were  solemnly 
read  before  the  consultation  began.  After  long  deliberation,  a 
petition  embodying  the  general  sense  was  written  by  the  Arch- 
bishop with  his  own  hand.  It  was  not  drawn  up  with  much  felicity 


414  English  Historians 

of  style.  Indeed,  the  cumbrous  and  inelegant  structure  of  the 
sentences  brought  on  Sancroft  some  raillery,  which  he  bore 
with  less  patience  than  he  showed  under  much  heavier  trials. 
But  in  substance  nothing  could  be  more  skilfully  framed  than  this 
memorable  document.  All  disloyalty,  all  intolerance,  was  ear- 
nestly disclaimed.  The  king  was  assured  that  the  Church  was 
still,  as  she  had  ever  been,  faithful  to  the  throne.  He  was 
assured  also  that  the  bishops  would,  in  proper  place  and  time,  as 
Lords  of  Parliament  and  members  of  the  Upper  House  of  Convo- 
cation, show  that  they  by  no  means  wanted  tenderness  for  the 
conscientious  scruples  of  Dissenters.  But  Parliament  had,  both 
in  the  late  and  in  the  present  reign,  pronounced  that  the  sovereign 
was  not  constitutionally  competent  to  dispense  with  statutes  in 
matters  ecclesiastical.  The  Declaration  was  therefore  illegal; 
and  the  petitioners  could  not,  in  prudence,  honor,  or  conscience, 
be  parties  to  the  solemn  publishing  of  an  illegal  Declaration  in  the 
house  of  God,  and  during  the  time  of  divine  service. 

This  paper  was  signed  by  the  Archbishop  and  by  six  of  his  suf- 
fragans, Lloyd  of  Saint  Asaph,  Turner  of  Ely,  Lake  of  Chichester,~ 
Ken  of  Bath  and  Wells,  White  of  Peterborough,  and  Trelawney  of 
Bristol.     The  Bishop  of  London,  being  under  suspension,  did  not 
sign. 

It  was  now  late  on  Friday  evening;  and  on  Sunday  morning  the 
Declaration  was  to  be  read  in  the  churches  of  London.  It  was 
necessary  to  put  the  paper  into  the  king's  hands  without  delay. 
The  six  bishops  crossed  the  river  to  Whitehall.  The  Archbishop, 
who  had  long  been  forbidden  the  court,  did  not  accompany  them. 
Lloyd,  leaving  his  five  brethren  at  the  house  of  Lord  Dartmouth  in 
the  vicinity  of  the  palace,  went  to  Sunderland,  and  begged  that 
minister  to  read  the  petition,  and  to  ascertain  when  the  king  would 
be  willing  to  receive  it.  Sunderland,  afraid  of  compromising 
himself,  refused  to  look  at  the  paper,  but  went  immediately  to  the 
royal  closet.  James  directed  that  the  bishops  should  be  admitted. 
He  had  heard  from  his  tool  Cartwright  that  they  were  disposed 
to  obey  the  royal  mandate,  but  that  they  wished  for  some  little 
modifications  in  form,  and  that  they  meant  to  present  a  humble 
request  to  that  effect.  His  majesty  was  therefore  in  a  very  good 
humor.  When  they  knelt  before  him,  he  graciously  told  them  to 
rise,  took  the  paper  from  Lloyd,  and  said,  "This  is  my  Lord  of 
Canterbury's  hand."  "Yes,  sir,  his  own  hand,"  was  the  answer. 
James  read  the  petition;  he  folded  it  up,  and  his  countenance 
grew  dark.  "This,"  he  said,  "is  a  great  surprise  to  me.  I  did 


James  II  and  the  Catholic  Reaction         415 

not  expect  this  from  your  Church,  especially  from  some  of  you. 
This  is  a  standard  of  rebellion." 

The  bishops  broke  out  into  passionate  professions  of  loyalty; 
but  the  king,  as  usual,  repeated  the  same  words  over  and  over. 
"I  tell  you  this  is  a  standard  of  rebellion."  " Rebellion!"  cried 
Trelawney,  falling  on  his  knees.  "For  God's  sake,  sir,  do  not  say 
so  hard  a  thing  of  us.  No  Trelawney  can  be  a  rebel.  Remember 
that  my  family  has  fought  for  the  crown.  Remember  how  I  served 
your  majesty  when  Monmouth  was  in  the  West."  "We  put  down 
the  last  rebellion,"  said  Lake :  "we  shall  not  raise  another."  "We 
rebel ! "  exclaimed  Turner;  "  we  are  ready  to  die  at  your  Majesty's 
feet."  "  Sir,"  said  Ken,  in  a  more  manly  tone,  "I  hope  that  you 
will  grant  to  us  that  liberty  of  conscience  which  you  grant  to  all 
mankind." 

Still  James  went  on.  "This  is  rebellion.  This  is  a  standard 
of  rebellion.  Did  ever  a  good  churchman  question  the  dispensing 
power  before  ?  Have  not  some  of  you  preached  for  it  and  written 
for  it?  It  is  a  standard  of  rebellion.  I  will  have  my  Declaration 
published."  "We  have  two  duties  to  perform,"  answered  Ken, 
"our  duty  to  God,  and  our  duty  to  your  Majesty.  We  honor  you; 
but  we  fear  God."  "Have  I  deserved  this?"  said  the  king,  more 
and  more  angry,  "  I  who  have  been  such  a  friend  to  your  Church  ? 
I  did  not  expect  this  from  some  of  you.  I  will  be  obeyed.  My 
Declaration  shall  be  published.  You  are  trumpeters  of  sedition. 
What  do  you  do  here?  Go  to  your  dioceses;  and  see  that  I  am 
obeyed.  I  will  keep  this  paper.  I  will  not  part  with  it,  I  will 
remember  you  that  have  signed  it."  "God's  will  be  done,"  said 
Ken.  "God  has  given  me  the  dispensing  power,"  said  the  king, 
"and  I  will  maintain  it.  I  will  tell  you  that  there  are  still  seven 
thousand  of  your  Church  who  have  not  bowed  the  knee  to  Baal." 
The  bishops  respectfully  retired.  That  very  evening  the  docu- 
ment which  they  had  put  into  the  hands  of  the  king  appeared  word 
for  word  in  print,  was  laid  on  the  tables  of  all  the  coffee-houses, 
and  was  cried  about  the  streets.  Everywhere  the  people  rose  from 
their  beds,  and  came  out  to  stop  the  hawkers.  It  was  said  that  the 
printer  cleared  a  thousand  pounds  in  a  few  hours  by  this  penny 
broadside.  This  is  probably  an  exaggeration;  but  it  is  an  ex- 
aggeration which  proves  that  the  sale  was  enormous.  How  the 
petition  got  abroad  is  still  a  mystery.  .  .  . 

In  the  City  and  Liberties  of  London  were  about  a  hundred 
parish  churches.  In  only  four  of  these  was  the  Order  in  Council 
obeyed.  At  Saint  Gregory's  the  Declaration  was  read  by  a  divine 


4i 6  English  Historians 

of  the  name  of  Martin.  As  soon  as  he  uttered  the  first  words,  the 
whole  congregation  rose  and  withdrew.  At  Saint  Matthew's,  in 
Friday  Street,  a  wretch  named  Timothy  Hall,  who  had  disgraced 
his  gown  by  acting  as  broker  for  the  Duchess  of  Portsmouth  in  the 
sale  of  pardons,  and  who  now  had  hopes  of  obtaining  the  vacant 
bishopric  of  Oxford,  was  in  like  manner  left  alone  in  his  church.  At 
Sergeant's  Inn,  in  Chancery  Lane,  the  clerk  pretended  that  he  had 
forgotten  to  bring  a  copy;  and  the  Chief  Justice  of  the  King's 
Bench,  who  had  attended  in  order  to  see  that  the  royal  mandate 
was  obeyed,  was  forced  to  content  himself  with  this  excuse.  Sam- 
uel Wesley,  the  father  of  John  and  Charles  Wesley,  a  curate  in 
London,  took  for  his  text  that  day  the  noble  answer  of  the  three 
Jews  to  the  Chaldean  tyrant:  "Be  it  known  unto  thee,  O  king, 
that  we  will  not  serve  thy  gods,  nor  worship  the  golden  image  which 
thou  hast  set  up."  Even  in  the  chapel  of  Saint  James's  Palace  the 
officiating  minister  had  the  courage  to  disobey  the  order.  The 
Westminster  boys  long  remembered  what  took  place  that  day  in 
the  Abbey.  Sprat,  Bishop  of  Rochester,  officiated  there  as  dean. 
As  soon  as  he  began  to  read  the  Declaration,  murmurs  and  the 
noise  of  people  crowding  out  of  the  choir  drowned  his  voice. 
He  trembled  so  violently  that  men  saw  the  paper  shake  in  his  hand. 
Long  before  he  had  finished,  the  place  was  deserted  by  all  but 
those  whose  situation  made  it  necessary  for  them  to  remain.  .  .  . 
Another  week  of  anxiety  and  agitation  passed  away.  Sunday 
came  again.  Again  the  churches  of  the  capital  were  thronged 
by  hundreds  of  thousands.  The  Declaration  was  read  nowhere 
except  at  the  very  few  places  where  it  had  been  read  the  week 
before.  The  minister  who  had  officiated  at  the  chapel  in  Saint 
James's  Palace  had  been  turned  out  of  his  situation;  a  more 
obsequious  divine  appeared  with  the  paper  in  his  hand,  but  his 
agitation  was  so  great  that  he  could  not  articulate.  In  truth,  the 
feeling  of  the  whole  nation  had  now  become  such  as  none  but  the 
very  best  and  noblest,  or  the  very  worst  and  basest,  of  mankind 
could  without  much  discomposure  encounter. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE  TO  CHAPTERS  VIII  AND  DC 

Traill,  William  III.  Seeley,  Growth  of  British  Policy,  Vol.  II,  pp. 
250  ff.  Lecky,  History  of  England  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  Vol.  I, 
chap.  i.  Ranke,  History  of  England,  Vol.  IV,  209  ff.  Hallam,  Consti- 
tutional History,  Vol.  II,  chaps,  xiv.  and  xv.  The  documents  are  to  be 
found  in  Robertson,  Select  Statutes,  Cases,  and  Documents. 


CHAPTER   IX 

THE  WHIG  REVOLUTION  AND   SETTLEMENT 

WHEN  the  actions  of  James  II  transcended  the  bounds  of  national 
patience,  a  self-constituted  committee  of  both  Whigs  and  Tories 
invited  William,  Prince  of  Orange,  to  come  over  with  an  armed  force 
to  defend  what  they  regarded  as  their  liberties.  William,  who 
wanted  to  draw  the  country  into  his  continental  schemes,  accepted 
the  invitation,  and  in  November,  1 688,  landed  in  England.  Deserted 
by  his  supporters,  James  could  not  make  even  a  semblance  of 
resistance,  and  consequently  fled  to  France.  In  January,  1689,  a 
convention  parliament  called  by  William  declared  that  the  throne 
was  vacant  and  offered  the  crown  to  him  and  Mary. 

§  i.   Discussion  of  Constitutional  Principles1 

It  was  now  known  to  whom  the  crown  would  be  given.  On 
what  conditions  it  should  be  given  still  remained  to  be  decided. 
The  Commons  had  appointed  a  committee  to  consider  what  steps 
it  might  be  advisable  to  take,  in  order  to  secure  law  and  liberty 
against  the  aggressions  of  future  sovereigns ;  and  the  committee 
had  made  a  report.  This  report  recommended,  first,  that  those 
great  principles  of  the  constitution  which  had  been  violated  by  the 
dethroned  king  should  be  solemnly  asserted;  and,  secondly,  that 
many  new  laws  should  be  enacted,  for  the  purpose  of  curbing  the 
.prerogative  and  purifying  the  administration  of  justice.  Most 
of  the  suggestions  of  the  committee  were  excellent ;  but  it  was 
utterly  impossible  that  the  Houses  could,  in  a  month,  or  even  a  year, 
deal  properly  with  matters  so  numerous,  so  various,  and  so  important. 
It  was  proposed,  among  other  things,  that  the  militia  should  be 
remodelled,  that  the  power  which  the  sovereign  possessed  of  pro- 
roguing and  dissolving  Parliaments  should  be  restricted  ;  that  the 

1  Macaulay,  History  oj  England,  chap.  x. 

2E  417 


4i  8  English  Historians 

duration  of  Parliaments  should  be  limited ;  that  the  royal  pardon 
should  no  longer  be  pleadable  to  a  parliamentary  impeachment; 
that  toleration  should  be  granted  to  Protestant  Dissenters  ;  that 
the  crime  of  high  treason  should  be  more  precisely  denned  ;  that 
trials  for  high  treason  should  be  conducted  in  a  manner  more 
favorable  to  innocence  ;  that  the  judges  should  hold  their  places 
for  life ;  that  the  mode  of  appointing  sheriffs  should  be  altered ; 
that  juries  should  be  nominated  in  such  a  way  as  might  exclude 
partiality  and  corruption  ;  that  the  practice  of  filing  criminal  in- 
formations in  the  King's  Bench  should  be  abolished  ;  that  the 
Court  of  Chancery  should  be  reformed ;  that  the  fees  of  public  func- 
tionaries should  be  regulated ;  and  that  the  law  of  quo  warranto 
should  be  amended.  It  was  evident  that  cautious  and  deliberate 
legislation  on  these  subjects  must  be  the  work  of  more  than  one 
laborious  session ;  and  it  was  equally  evident  that  hasty  and  crude 
legislation  on  subjects  so  grave  could  not  but  produce  new  griev- 
ances, worse  than  those  which  it  might  remove.  If  the  committee 
meant  to  give  a  list  of  the  reforms  which  ought  to  be  accomplished 
before  the  throne  was  filled,  the  list  was  absurdly  long.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  committee  meant  to  give  a  list  of  all  the  reforms 
which  the  legislature  would  do  well  to  make  in  proper  season, 
the  list  was  strangely  imperfect.  Indeed,  as  soon  as  the  report 
had  been  read,  member  after  member  rose  to  suggest  some  addition. 
It  was  moved  and  carried  that  the  selling  of  offices  should- be  pro- 
hibited, that  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act  should  be  made  more  efficient, 
and  that  the  law  of  mandamus  be  revised.  One  gentleman  fell 
on  the  chimneymen;  another  on  the  excisemen;  and  the  House 
resolved  that  the  malpractices  of  both  chimneymen  and  excise- 
men should  be  restrained.  .  .  . 

The  House  was  greatly  perplexed.  Some  orators  vehemently 
said  that  too  much  time  had  been  already  lost/and  that  the  gov- 
ernment ought  to  be  settled  without  the  delay  of  a  day.  Society 
was  unquiet;  trade  was  languishing;  the  English  colony  in  Ireland 
was  in  imminent  danger  of  perishing;  a  foreign  war  was  impend- 
ing; the  exiled  king  might,  in  a  few  weeks,  be  at  Dublin  with  a 
French  army,  and  from  Dublin  he  might  soon  cross  to  Chester. 
Was  it  not  insanity,  at  such  a  crisis,  to  leave  the  throne  unfilled, 
and,  while  the  very  existence  of  Parliaments  was  in  jeopardy,  to 
waste  time  in  debating  whether  Parliaments  should  be  prorogued 
by  the  sovereign  or  by  themselves  ?  On  the  other  side  it  was  asked 
whether  the  Convention  could  think  that  it  had  fulfilled  its  mission 
by  merely  pulling  down  one  prince  and  putting  up  another. 


The  Whig  Revolution  and  Settlement       419 

Surely  now  or  never  was  the  time  to  secure  public  liberty  by  such 
fences  as  might  effectually  prevent  the  encroachments  of  preroga- 
tive. There  was  doubtless  great  weight  in  what  was  urged  on 
both  sides.  The  able  chiefs  of  the  Whig  party,  among  whom 
Somers  was  fast  rising  to  ascendency,  proposed  a  middle  course. 
The  House  had,  they  said,  two  objects  in  view,  which  ought  to  be 
kept  distinct.  One  object  was  to  secure  the  old  polity  of  the  realm 
against  illegal  attacks;  the  other  was  to  improve  that  polity  by 
legal  reforms.  The  former  object  might  be  attained  by  solemnly 
putting  on  record,  in  the  resolution  which  called  the  new  sovereigns 
to  the  throne,  the  claim  of  the  English  nation  to  its  ancient  fran- 
chises, so  that  the  king  might  hold  his  crown,  and  the  people  their 
privileges,  by  one  and  the  same  title-deed.  The  latter  object 
would  require  a  whole  volume  of  elaborate  statutes.  The  former 
object  might  be  attained  in  a  day ;  the  latter,  scarcely  in  five  years. 
As  to  the  former  object,  all  parties  were  agreed ;  as  to  the  latter, 
there  were  innumerable  varieties  of  opinion.  No  member  of  either 
House  would  hesitate  for  a  moment  to  vote  that  the  king  could  not 
levy  taxes  without  the  consent  of  Parliament;  but  it  would  be 
hardly  possible  to  frame  any  new  law  of  procedure  in  cases  of  high 
treason  which  would  not  give  rise  to  a  long  debate,  and  be  con- 
demned by  some  persons  as  unjust  to  the  prisoner,  and  by  others  as 
unjust  to  the  crown.  The  business  of  an  extraordinary  convention 
of  the  Estates  of  the  Realm  was  not  to  do  the  ordinary  work  of 
Parliaments,  to  regulate  the  fees  of  masters  in  chancery,  and  to 
provide  against  the  exactions  of  gaugers,  but  to  put  right  the  great 
machine  of  government.  When  this  had  been  done,  it  would  be 
time  ti  inquire  what  improvement  our  institutions  needed;  nor 
would  anything  be  risked  by  delay ;  for  no  sovereign  who  reigned 
merely  by  the  choice  of  the  nation  could  long  refuse  his  assent  to 
any  improvement  which  the  nation,  speaking  through  its  represen- 
tatives, demanded. 

§  2.   Formulation  of  the  Declaration  of  Right 

On  these  grounds  the  Commons  wisely  determined  to  postpone 
all  reforms  till  the  ancient  constitution  of  the  kingdom  should 
have  been  restored  in  all  its  parts,  and  forthwith  to  fill  the  throne 
without  imposing  on  William  and  Mary  any  other  obligation  than 
that  of  governing  according  to  the  existing  laws  of  England.  In 
order  that  the  questions  which  had  been  in  dispute  between  the 
Stuarts  and  the  nation  might  never  again  be  stirred,  it  was  deter- 


420  English  Historians 

mined  that  the  instrument  by  which  the  Prince  and  Princess  of 
Orange  were  called  to  the  throne,  and  by  which  the  order  of  suc- 
cession was  settled,  should  set  forth,  in  the  most  distinct  and 
solemn  manner,  the  fundamental  principles  of  the  constitution. 
This  instrument,  known  by  the  name  of  the  Declaration  of  Right, 
was  prepared  by  a  committee,  of  which  Somers  was  chairman. 
The  fact  that  the  low-born  young  barrister  was  appointed  to  so 
honorable  and  important  a  post  in  a  Parliament  filled  with  able 
and  experienced  men,  only  ten  days  after  he  had  spoken  in  the 
House  of  Commons  for  the  first  time,  sufficiently  proves  the  supe- 
riority of  his  abilities.  In  a  few  hours  the  Declaration  was 
framed  and  approved  by  the  Commons.  The  Lords  assented 
to  it  with  some  amendments  of  no  great  importance. 

The  Declaration  began  by  recapitulating  the  crimes  and  errors 
which  had  made  a  revolution  necessary.  James  had  invaded  the 
province  of  the  legislature;  had  treated  modest  petitioning  as  a 
crime ;  had  oppressed  the  Church  by  means  of  an  illegal  tribunal ; 
had,  without  the  consent  of  Parliament,  levied  taxes  and  main- 
tained a  standing  army  in  time  of  peace ;  had  violated  the  freedom 
of  election,  and  perverted  the  cause  of  justice.  Proceedings  which 
could  lawfully  be  questioned  only  in  Parliament  had  been  made  the 
subjects  of  prosecution  in  the  King's  Bench.  Partial  and  corrupt 
juries  had  been  returned;  excessive  bail  had  been  required  from 
prisoners ;  excessive  fines  had  been  imposed ;  barbarous  and  un- 
usual punishments  had  been  inflicted ;  the  estates  of  accused  persons 
had  been  granted  away  before  conviction.  He,  by  whose  authority 
these  things  had  been  done,  had  abdicated  the  government.  The 
Prince  of  Orange,  whom  God  had  made  the  glorious  instrument 
of  delivering  the  nation  from  superstition  and  tyranny,  had  invited 
the  Estates  of  the  Realm  to  meet  and  to  take  counsel  together  for  the 
securing  of  religion,  of  law,  and  of  freedom.  The  Lords  and  Com- 
mons, having  deliberated,  had  resolved  that  they  would  first,  after 
the  example  of  their  ancestors,  assert  the  ancient  rights  and  liber- 
ties of  England.  Therefore  it  was  declared  that  the  dispensing 
power,  as  lately  assumed  and  exercised,  had  no  legal  existence; 
that,  without  grant  of  Parliament,  no  money  could  be  exacted  by 
the  sovereign  from  the  subject;  that,  without  consent  of  Parlia- 
ment, no  standing  army  could  be  kept  up  in  time  of  peace.  The 
right  of  subjects  to  petition,  the  right  of  electors  to  choose  represen- 
tatives freely,  the  right  of  the  legislature  to  freedom  of  debate, 
the  right  of  the  nation  to  a  pure  and  merciful  administration  of 
justice  according  to  the  spirit  of  our  mild  laws,  were  solemnly 


The  Whig  Revolution  and  Settlement       421 

affirmed.  All  these  things,  the  Commons  claimed,  as  the  un- 
doubted inheritance  of  Englishmen.  Having  thus  vindicated 
the  principles  of  the  constitution,  the  Lords  and  Commons,  in 
the  entire  confidence  that  the  deliverer  would  hold  sacred  the  laws 
and  liberties  which  he  had  saved,  resolved  that  William  and  Mary, 
Prince  and  Princess  of  Orange,  should  be  declared  king  and  queen 
of  England  for  their  joint  and  separate  lives,  and  that  during  their 
joint  lives,  the  administration  of  the  government  should  be  in  the 
Prince  alone.  After  them  the  crown  was  settled  on  the  posterity 
of  Mary,  then  on  Anne  and  her  posterity,  and  then  on  the  pos- 
terity of  William.  .  .  . 

§  3.    William  and  Mary  Proclaimed 

On  the  morning  of  Wednesday,  the  thirteenth  of  February,  the 
court  of  Whitehall  and  all  the  neighboring  streets  were  filled  with 
gazers.  The  magnificent  banqueting  house,  the  masterpiece  of 
Inigo,  embellished  by  masterpieces  of  Rubens,  had  been  prepared 
for  a  great  ceremony.  The  walls  were  lined  by  the  yeomen  of  the 
guard.  Near  the  northern  door,  on  the  right  hand,  a  large  number 
of  Peers  had  assembled.  On  the  left  were  the  Commons  with 
their  Speaker,  attended  by  the  mace.  The  southern  door  opened ; 
and  the  Prince  and  Princess  of  Orange,  side  by  side,  entered,  and 
took  their  place  under  the  canopy  of  state. 

Both  Houses  approached,  bowing  low.  William  and  Mary 
advanced  a  few  steps.  Halifax  on  the  right,  and  Powle  on  the  left, 
stood  forth;  and  Halifax  spoke.  The  Convention,  he  said,  had 
agret  d  to  a  resolution  which  he  prayed  their  Highnesses  to  hear. 
They  signified  their  assent ;  and  the  clerk  of  the  House  of  Lords 
read,  in  a  loud  voice,  the  Declaration  of  Right.  When  he  had 
concluded,  Halifax,  in  the  name  of  all  the  Estates  of  the  Realm, 
requested  the  prince  and  princess  to  accept  the  crown. 

William,  in  his  own  name  and  in  that  of  his  wife,  answered  that 
the  crown  was,  in  their  estimation,  the  more  valuable  because  it 
was  presented  to  them  as  a  token  of  the  confidence  of  the  nation. 
"We  thankfully  accept,"  he  said,  "what  you  have  offered  us." 
Then,  for  himself,  he  assured  them  that  the  laws  of  England, 
which  he  had  once  already  vindicated,  should  be  the  rules  of  his 
conduct,  that  it  should  be  his  study  to  promote  the  welfare  of  the 
kingdom,  and  that,  as  to  the  means  of  doing  so,  he  should  con- 
stantly recur  to  the  advice  of  the  Houses,  and  should  be  disposed 
to  trust  their  judgment  rather  than  his  own.  These  words  were 


422  English   Historians 

received  with  a  shout  of  joy  which  was  heard  in  the  streets  below 
an.l  was  instantly  answered  by  huzzas  from  many  thousands  of 
voices.  The  Lords  and  Commons  then  reverently  retired  from  the 
banqueting  house  and  went  in  procession  to  the  great  gate  of 
Whitehall,  where  the  heralds  and  pursuivants  were  waiting  in 
their  gorgeous  tabards.  All  the  space  as  far  as  Charing  Cross  was 
one  sea  of  heads.  The  kettledrums  struck  up  ;  the  trumpets 
pealed ;  and  Garter  king  at  arms,  in  a  loud  voice,  proclaimed  the 
Prince  and  Princess  of  Orange  king  and  queen  of  England,  charged 
all  Englishmen  to  bear,  from  that  moment,  true  allegiance  to  the 
new  sovereigns,  and  besought  God,  who  had  already  wrought  so 
signal  a  deliverance  for  our  Church  and  nation,  to  bless  William 
and  Mary  with  a  long  and  happy  reign. 


PART  VI 

THE  EXPANSION   OF   ENGLAND 
CHAPTER   I 

MOTIVES   FOR   COLONIZATION 

AT  the  opening  of  the  sixteenth  century,  while  the  Portuguese 
were  enriching  themselves  by  the  trade  of  the  East,  and  the  Span- 
iards were  carving  out  new  dominions  in  Mexico  and  Peru,  it 
looked  as  if  England  was  destined  to  be  a  small  insular  power. 
But  it  was  not  to  be  so,  for  within  three  or  four  generations,  Eng- 
lish ships  were  in  every  sea  and  Englishmen  were  embarking  on 
commercial  and  colonial  enterprises  which  were  in  time  to  out- 
rival those  of  every  other  nation.  As  a  result  of  this,  the  inter- 
national politics  of  Europe  for  the  last  three  centuries  can  be  under- 
stood solely  in  the  light  of  the  economic  interests  engendered  in 
the  race  for  markets  and  territorial  dominion.  English  activities 
spread  to  the  four  corners  of  the  earth,  and  within  England  interests 
and  policies  were  developed  which  transformed  that  country  from 
a  feudal  into  an  industrial  state.  It  therefore  becomes  imperative 
that  one  should  study  the  industrial  and  commercial  forces  which 
have  been  so  predominant  in  the  modern  age.  The  fullest  and 
most  scholarly  account  of  these  great  interests  is  to  be  found  in 
Dr.  Cunningham's  Growth  of  English  Industry  and  Commerce, 
from  which  this  analysis  of  early  motives  for  colonization  is  taken. 

§  i.    Questionable  Advantages  of  Colonization  l 

Much  had  been  done,  before  the  seventeenth  century  opened, 
in  developing  the  maritime  power  of  England,  but  the  process 

1  Cunningham,  Growth  of  English  Industry  and  Commerce  (1904),  Vol. 
II,  Part  I.  pp.  331  ff.  By  permission  of  Dr.  Cunningham  and  the  Cam- 
bridge University  Press. 

423 


424  English  Historians 

of  settling  in  distant  lands  had  hardly  begun.  The  foundations 
of  our  colonial  empire  were  laid  during  the  reigns  of  the  Stuarts. 
At  the  accession  of  James  I,  Englishmen  had  not  established  their 
footing  either  in  Asia,  Africa,  or  the  American  continent.  Their 
hold  upon  Newfoundland,  with  a  share  in  the  fisheries  off  its  coast, 
gave  them  their  only  sphere  of  influence  in  distant  regions  ;  for 
their  attempts  to  plant  in  Virginia  had  not  so  far  been  crowned 
with  success.  But  within  ninety  years  there  was  a  marvellous 
change.  At  the  Peace  of  Ryswick,  England  was  secure  in  the 
possession  of  more  or  less  extensive  territories  in  Africa,  in 
North  and  in  South  America.  The  East  India  Company  and 
Hudson's  Bay  Company  had  several  valuable  factories  for  trade, 
and  St.  Helena,  the  Bahamas,  Bermudas,  Jamaica,  and  other 
West  Indian  islands  had  also  been  acquired.  There  is  no  side 
of  economic  life  in  which  the  progress  during  this  period  was 
so  marked  as  in  colonization;  it  is  the  new  and  characteristic 
contribution  of  this  century  to  the  development  of  England's 
material  greatness. 

There  has  been  much  discussion  at  various  times  as  to  the  benefit 
which  colonies  confer  on  the  mother  country ;  Whigs  in  the  eigh- 
teenth, and  the  Manchester  School  in  the  nineteenth  century,  were 
inclined  to  disparage  them  as  a  mere  encumbrance,  and  would  not 
have  been  unwilling  to  be  rid  of  them  altogether.  We  have  com- 
pletely outlived  that  feeling;  but  the  fact  that  the  advantage  or 
disadvantage  of  developing  colonies  abroad  continued  for  so  long 
to  be  a  subject  of  dispute,  makes  it  necessary  to  inquire  carefully 
into  the  reasons  which  weighed  with  the  men  who  acted  as  the 
pioneers  in  the  expansion  of  England.  The  difficulties  which 
they  had  to  face  were  enormous ;  the  distance  of  the  colonists  from 
the  mother  country,  and  the  irregularity  of  communication,  exposed 
them  to  serious  perils ;  while  their  ignorance  of  the  climate,  and  the 
uncertainty  of  their  relations  with  the  natives,  proved  nearly  fatal 
to  more  than  one  enterprise. 

We  must  also  bear  in  mind  that  there  was  in  many  quarters 
a  feeling  not  merely  of  indifference,  but  of  positive  antagonism  to 
these  undertakings.  Like  the  distant  trade  of  the  East  India  Com- 
pany, these  settlements  seemed  to  divert  labor  and  capital  that 
could  be  usefully  employed  on  English  soil,  without  any  compen- 
sating advantage.  The  decrepit  condition  of  Spain,  despite  her 
enormous  American  possessions,  gave  some  color  to  the  opinion 
that  colonies  were  a  drain  on  the  mother  country  rather  than  a 
source  of  wealth.  If  Philip  II,  it  could  be  asked,  had  derived  so 


Motives  for  Colonization  425 

little  benefit  from  the  richest  lands  of  the  New  World,  what  ad- 
vantage was  there  in  spreading  over  the  less  coveted  regions  which 
she  had  left  untenanted  ?  There  were,  however,  various  motives, 
political,  religious,  and  economic,  which  combined  to  induce  under- 
takers and  emigrants  to  engage  in  colonial  enterprise,  and  influ- 
enced the  government  to  view  it  with  favor. 

§  2.   Political  Aims  in  Colonial  Operations 

Political  aims  were  obviously  operating  in  the  various  schemes 
of  plantation  which  were  floated  during  the  reign  of  James  I. 
The  task  was  undertaken  in  Ireland,  with  the  hope  of  introducing 
some  sort  of  stable  government  into  that  unhappy  country,  where 
the  crown  had  entirely  failed  to  establish  effective  authority  over 
the  native  population.  The  statesmen  of  the  day  came  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  only  hope  of  reducing  the  island  to  order  lay  in 
abandoning  the  attempt  to  adapt  Irish  institutions  to  the  pur- 
poses of  government,  and  in  seriously  attempting  to  create  a 
new  system.  They  came  to  the  conclusion  that  this  could  be 
best  accomplished  by  settling  it  with  Englishmen,  who  would 
hold  the  land  on  some  secure  form  of  tenure,  and  would  main- 
tain their  own  language  and  laws  uncontaminated  by  contact 
with  Irish  neighbors. 

It  was  necessary  to  deport  many  septs  in  order  to  give  this  scheme 
a  trial,  and  only  to  admit  a  small  portion  of  the  native  population. 
Sir  Arthur  Chichester  and  Sir  John  Da  vies  hoped  that  by  promoting 
immigration  they  might  diffuse  a  respect  for  the  authority  of  the 
crown  in  all  parts  of  the  island,  and  secure  the  presence  of  men 
on  wnose  help  they  could  rely  for  the  various  purposes  of  local 
government.  Under  James  I  and  Charles  I  the  settlements  had 
a  highly  military  character,  as  it  was  not  merely  necessary  for  the 
colonists  to  be  able  to  hold  their  own  against  Irish  raids,  but  also 
to  be  ready  to  defend  the  country,  in  the  not  improbable  event  of 
a  Spanish  invasion.  From  the  time  of  Cromwell  there  was  less 
need  for  fortifications  and  strongholds;  he  subjugated  the  island 
so  entirely  that  English  law  and  language  became  dominant,  and 
material  progress  on  English  lines  seemed  possible.  The  native 
Irish  were  collected  in  Galway,  between  the  Shannon  and  an  in- 
hospitable coast,  where  they  could  do  little  to  assist  the  Spaniards 
or  French  in  any  attack  they  might  make.  In  the  early  part  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  plantation  was  necessary  as  a  step  towards 
consolidating  the  political  and  administrative  system  of  the  British 
Isles.  Immigration  to  Ireland  was  encouraged,  with  the  object 


426  English  Historians 

of  improving  the  efficiency  of  government  in  an  island  that  had 
long  formed  part  of  the  dominions  of  the  crown. 

Political  aims  were  also  kept  in  view  in  all  the  schemes  for 
colonizing  beyond  the  Atlantic.  It  was  hoped  that  these  planta- 
tions would  tend  to  restrict  the  overweening  power  of  Spain  in  the 
New  World,  and  might  even  serve  as  a  basis  for  attacking  it. 
Deep-seated  hostility  to  the  Spanish  type  of  civilization  was  com- 
bined in  the  minds  of  many  Englishmen  with  dread  at  finding  so 
much  wealth  and  power  concentrating  in  a  single  monarchy.  The 
sense  of  antagonism  to  the  Spanish  system  first  awakened  in  the 
minds  of  Englishmen  a  consciousness  of  their  duty  and  destiny 
to  plant  free  institutions  in  the  lands  beyond  the  sea.  Till  the 
seventeenth  century  no  serious  effort  had  been  made  to  Anglicize 
Ireland;  Englishmen  had  been  satisfied  to  live  their  own  life  in 
their  own  island.  The  discovery  of  America,  and  the  develop- 
ment of  maritime  power  under  Elizabeth,  had,  however,  provided 
an  opportunity  for  diffusing  English  civilization  in  the  New 
World.  The  men  of  the  seventeenth  century  threw  themselves 
eagerly  into  the  task.  England  recognized  and  accepted  her 
vocation. 

§  3.    The  Religious  Motive  in  Colonization 

The  inner  reasons  for  the  antagonism  to  Spain,  which  had  so 
much  to  do  with  shaping  the  colonial  ambitions  of  Englishmen, 
were  rather  religious  than  political.  The  rule  of  the  most  Catholic 
majesty,  with  the  scope  it  gave  for  the  Inquisition,  was  abhorrent 
to  Protestants.  Interference  in  America  was  a  defiance  of  the 
authority  claimed  by  the  pope  to  partition  out  the  newly  dis- 
covered lands  between  Portugal  and  Spain.  The  planting  of  a 
New  England  across  the  seas  was  an  idea  that  appealed  strongly 
to  men  of  a  religious  temperament,  as  well  as  to  those  who  were 
moved  by  considerations  of  political  expediency.  Religious  and 
pecuniary  motives  had  been  intimately  blended  in  the  Crusades, 
and  in  this  respect  English  colonization  resembled  them  at  the 
outset. 

The  plantation  of  Virginia  was  regarded  by  Hakluyt  and  some 
other  men,  who  formed  a  London  .company  with  this  object  in 
1606,  as  not  only  a  commercial  but  also  a  missionary  enterprise. 
They  set  about  their  adventure  in  the  hope  that  it  would  "here- 
after tend  to  the  glory  of  his  Divine  Majesty,  in  propagating  of 
Christian  religion,  to  such  people  as  yet  live  in  darkness  and  mis- 
erable ignorance  of  the  true  knowledge  and  worship  of  God,  and 


Motives  for  Colonization  427 

may  in  time  bring  the  infidels  and  savages  living  in  those  parts 
to  human  civility,  and  to  a  settled  and  quiet  government."  The 
Company  endeavored  to  be  careful  in  the  selection  of  the  men 
who  were  to  emigrate  and  to  refuse  "idle  and  wicked  persons 
such  as  shame  or  fear  compels  into  this  action,  and  such  as  are  the 
weeds  and  rankness  of  this  land";  they  issued  a  true  and  sincere 
declaration .  to  show  what  settlers  they  would  accept,  both  as 
regards  religion  and  conversation,  and  faculties,  arts,  and  trades. 
They  also  made  careful  provision  for  the  maintenance  of  the  reli- 
gious habits  they  prized  so  highly;  churches  were  built  with  such 
elaboration  as  their  means  allowed,  and  the  practice  of  attending 
the  daily  services  there  was  carefully  enforced.  The  whole  work 
of  colonization  was  treated  as  an  enterprise  in  which  it  was  a  work 
of  piety  to  engage,  and  collections  were  made  in  parish  churches 
for  the  college  that  was  planned,  for  English  and  Indians,  at 
Henrico.  The  work  continued  despite  many  difficulties  of  every 
kind.  Notwithstanding  the  efforts  of  the  Company,  the  colony 
had  been  the  refuge  of  a  certain  number  of  dissolute  adventurers 
from  the  first;  there  had  been  much  difficulty  in  keeping  them  in 
order,  and  in  preserving  friendly  relations  with  the  natives,  while 
there  had  been  many  quarrels  among  the  officials.  On  the  whole, 
the  colony  prospered  more  in  its  material  life  than  as  a  missionary 
enterprise ;  but  it  was  r  jt  in  a  very  flourishing  condition  at  the  close 
of  King  James'  reign. 

The  religious  impulse  was  also  strongly  at  work  in  the  first  settle- 
ment of  New  England,  not  merely  as  affecting  the  spirit  in  which 
the  enterprise  was  planned,  but  also  as  affording  the  main  motive 
of  those  who  actually  emigrated.  The  Pilgrim  Fathers  were  not 
much  concerned  in  planting  the  existing  English  type  of  Christian 
civilization  in  the  New  World;  but  they  desired  to  secure  the 
opportunity  of  founding  a  society  for  themselves  which  should 
be  thoroughly  scriptural  in  character ;  they  hoped  that  this  would 
serve  as  a  bright  example  to  the  rest  of  mankind.  They  estab- 
lished a  very  strict  ecclesiastical  discipline,  but  one  which  was 
entirely  unlike  the  system  they  had  found  so  galling  in  England. 
Under  their  scheme  temporal  privileges  were  dependent  on  church 
membership.  "Most  of  the  persons  at  New  England  are  not 
admitted  of  their  Church  and  therefore  are  not  freemen;  and 
when  they  come  to  be  tried  there,  be  it  for  life  or  limb,  name  or 
estate,  or  whatsoever,  they  must  be  tried  and  judged  too  by  those 
of  the  Church,  who  are  in  a  sort  their  adversaries."  The  enthu- 
siasts for  Theocracy  sought  out  witches  and  banished  Antinomians ; 


428  English  Historians 

they  even  expelled  and  shipped  off  two  members  of  the  council 
who  were  in  favor  of  using  the  Prayer  Book. 

In  a  community  of  men  of  this  type  there  was  much  intense  in- 
dividual earnestness,  but  little  sense  of  corporate  duty  to  their 
neighbors,  except  in  the  way  of  furnishing  them  with  a  model  to 
copy.  Though  they  had  traded  with  the  Indians,  they  had  made 
no  serious  efforts  to  civilize  them,  and  had  been  careful  to  keep 
them  at  arm's  length.  The  war  of  extermination,  waged  against 
the  Pequod  nation,  alarmed  all  the  neighboring  tribes;  and  some 
of  the  colonies  found  it  wise,  in  1643,  f°r  their  own  security,  to  con- 
solidate themselves  into  "The  United  Colonies  of  New  England." 
Massachusetts,  Plymouth,  Connecticut,  and  New  Haven  were  the 
first  members  of  this  union.  It  was  the  beginning  of  that  federa- 
tion which  has  proved  such  a  convenient  system  for  governing  a 
growing  nation.  Both  in  the  nature  of  the  impulse  which  gave 
them  birth,  and  in  the  character  of  the  settlements  themselves, 
there  is  a  marked  contrast  between  the  history  of  the  Northern  and 
Southern  colonies  on  the  American  coast. 

Religious  convictions  of  different  kinds  exercised  a  considerable 
influence  in  connection  with  the  planting  of  other  English  settle- 
ments in  North  America.  Maryland  was  taken  in  hand  by  Sir 
George  Calvert,  a  Romanist,  in  1632;  through  the  personal  con- 
nections of  the  proprietor,  this  territory  became  the  resort  of  such 
of  his  co-religionists  as  emigrated.  It  was  a  district  where  English 
Romanists  obtained  toleration,  till  the  aggressive  action  of  the 
Jesuits  called  forth  the  inevitable  reaction.  Liberty  of  conscience 
was  adopted,  as  a  matter  of  conviction,  by  Roger  Williams  at 
Rhode  Island,  the  settlement  which  he  founded  in  1636,  after  he 
had  been  obliged  to  withdraw  from  New  England,  and  a  similar 
course  was  pursued  by  the  Quakers  in  West  New  Jersey  and  Penn- 
sylvania. No  serious  effort  was  made  to  enforce  religious  uni- 
formity after  the  Restoration,  and  the  principle  of  civil  toleration 
was  formulated,  on  grounds  of  expediency,  in  the  Constitutions 
which  Locke  drew  up  for  Carolina.  He  hoped  that  peace  might 
be  maintained  among  the  diversity  of  opinions,  "and  that  Jews, 
heathen  and  other  dissenters  from  the  Christian  religion  might  not 
be  scared  away  from  the  new  colony."  When  the  Puritan  The- 
ocracy succumbed  before  the  storm  which  was  raised  by  the  trials 
of  witches  in  New  England,  there  was  no  longer  any  effective 
obstacle  to  the  diffusion  of  Whig  principles  in  regard  to  religious 
liberty.  They  found  a  congenial  soil,  and  have  so  deeply  impreg- 
nated American  life  and  thought  that  there  is  some  excuse  for  the 


Motives  for  Colonization  429 

mistake  of  regarding  them  as  an  original  element  in  its  compo- 
sition. 

§  4.   Colonies  as  Sources  of  Gain 

Religious  motives  had  much  to  do  in  shaping  the  character  of 
particular  settlements,  but  the  main  impulse  in  the  work  of  colo- 
nization was  economic.  The  plantations  offered  a  field  for  the 
profitable  investment  of  capital.  While  many  of  the  London 
merchants  were  eager  to  establish  themselves  on  English  soil, 
others  were  ready  to  develop  colonial  resources,  and  to  promote  the 
cultivation  of  products,  such  as  tobacco  and  sugar,  which  were 
in  demand  in  European  lands.  The  development  of  the  Southern 
colonies  and  the  West  Indian  Islands  was  promoted  by  moneyed 
men  in  England,  who  directed  the  energies  of  the  planters  into 
raising  commodities  for  export.  These  traders  were  not  specially 
concerned  to  foster  communities  which  should  be  self-sufficing; 
they  preferred  that  the  planters  should  manage  their  estates  with 
a  view  to  the  requirements  of  outside  markets.  As  a  consequence, 
there  was  little  subsistence  farming  in  these  regions.  The  land 
was  mostly  held  in  large  estates  by  men  who  carried  on  their  busi- 
ness, either  with  their  own  capital  or  through  the  help  of  the  credit 
extended  to  them  by  the  merchants  who  were  interested  in  the 
trade.  The  course  which  these  London  capitalists  pursued  did 
not  always  commend  itself  to  the  government;  King  James, 
while  he  sympathized  with  their  enterprise,  was  somewhat  afraid 
of  pushing  it  too  vigorously,  and  involving  himself  in  a  dispute 
with  Spain.  Charles  I  was  eager  for  the  prosperity  of  Virginia, 
and  was  anxious  that  the  colony  should  at  least  provide  its  own 
food  supply;  he  feared  that  the  future  of  the  territory  was  being 
sacrificed  to  the  immediate  gain  of  the  planters.  It  was  clear, 
however,  that  the  development  of  these  settlements  was  of  advan- 
tage to  the  realm,  and  successive  commissions  gave  careful  atten- 
tion to  their  affairs.  For  one  thing,  the  plantations  served  to 
supplement  the  resources  of  the  realm,  and  to  furnish  supplies  of 
commodities  which  had  hitherto  been  procured  from  abroad,  so  as 
to  diminish  the  commercial  indebtedness  of  the  country  and  to 
influence  the  balance  of  trade  in  our  favor.  Again,  the  trade  with 
the  colonies  opened  up  a  field  for  the  employment  of  our  shipping ; 
and  efforts  were  made,  both  by  the  crown  and  Parliament,  to 
restrict  this  newly  established  line  of  intercourse  to  English  vessels, 
in  the  interest  of  the  maritime  power  of  the  country.  After  the 


430  English  Historians 

Restoration,  when  the  plantations  were  firmly  established,  a  third 
economic  advantage  to  the  mother  country  came  more  and  more 
clearly  into  view.  The  colonists  demanded  considerable  quan- 
tities of  European  goods,  and  the  progress  of  the  settlements  opened 
a  larger  market,  the  advantage  of  which  English  manufacturers 
endeavored  to  retain  for  themselves.  On  these  various  grounds 
English  moneyed  men  were  inclined  to  promote  the  plantation 
of  new  areas,  and  the  English  governments  were  ready  to  approve 
of  the  undertaking. 

§  5.   Colonies  as  Homes  /or  Englishmen 

There  must  also  have  been  a  very  large  class  who  looked  eagerly 
to  the  plantations  in  the  hope  of  finding  a  sphere  where  they  could 
engage,  as  independent  men,  in  rural  occupations.  They  may 
have  had  little  capital  of  their  own,  but  they  were  confident  that 
if  they  obtained  a  start,  they  could  make  a  living  by  their  labor. 
There  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  material  prosperity,  and  the 
comparative  peace,  which  England  enjoyed  during  the  Elizabethan 
and  Jacobean  periods,  had  resulted  in  a  considerable  increase 
of  population.  The  growth  of  trade  afforded  openings  for  her 
younger  sons  of  country  gentlemen;  but  there  must  have  been  a 
large  number  of  young  men  who  greatly  preferred  an  outdoor  life, 
and  who  had  difficulty  in  raising  the  premium  that  was  required 
in  order  to  be  apprenticed  to  any  branch  of  commerce.  The  fact 
that  the  competition  for  farms  was  so  keen,  is  an  incidental  proof 
that  there  were  a  number  of  men  who  desired  to  follow  this  avo- 
cation; and  if  they  had  no  opportunity  at  home,  they  would  be 
ready  to  look  for  one  abroad.  Such  men  would  be  prepared  to 
devote  their  own  labor  to  the  arduous  work  of  clearing  and  tilling 
the  ground  for  a  livelihood ;  they  desired  to  have  a  holding  which 
they  could  work  on  their  own  account.  Those  plantations,  which 
did  not  raise  suitable  products  for  export,  offered  a  poor  prospect 
of  profit  to  the  capitalists,  but  they  would  attract  the  classes  of  the 
community  who  were  prepared  to  engage  in  farming  for  subsist- 
ence. It  was  almost  inevitable  that  the  colonies  which  were 
suitable  for  the  growth  of  cereals  should  be  settled  with  small 
homesteads,  and  not  with  large  plantations  managed  by  men  who 
were  catering  for  distant  markets.  . 

There  have  been  many  periods  of  English  history  when  the 
government  would  have  looked  askance  on  schemes  for  drawing  off 
large  numbers  of  adult  men  to  distant  countries,  where  they  could 


Motives  for  Colonization  431 

not  be  called  upon  to  play  a  personal  part  in  defending  England 
against  invaders.  More  pressing  anxiety  was  felt  in  the  seven- 
teenth century  as  to  the  best  means  of  utilizing  the  able-bodied 
population  in  times  of  peace;  and  the  government  was  quite  pre- 
pared to  give  active  assistance  in  promoting  emigration.  The 
statute  of  1563  had  doubtless  done  much  to  bring  about  the  ab- 
sorption of  vagrants  in  industrial  pursuits;  but,  despite  the  excel- 
lence of  the  London  system  for  dealing  with  the  poor,  there  appears 
to  have  been  a  considerable  body  of  the  unemployed  in  the  city 
during  the  earlier  part  of  the  reign  of  James  I.  Among  the  motives 
and  reasons  which  the  king  urged  with  the  view  of  inducing  the 
city  to  promote  the  Ulster  Plantations  it  was  pointed  out  that, 
if  a  body  of  the  inhabitants  were  to  hive  off  from  London  to  Dcrry, 
the  evils  of  overcrowding  would  be  reduced,  and  there  would 
neither  be  the  same  risk  of  infection  nor  as  great  a  pressure  of  com- 
petition. The  city  was  not  easily  induced  to  take  active  steps  in 
response  to  the  invitation.  In  the  subsequent  story  we  hear  more 
of  the  king's  endeavors  to  obtain  contributions  in  money  than  of 
any  great  success  in  securing  emigrants  from  London. 

The  city  merchants  were  much  more  keenly  alive  to  the  advantage 
of  developing  trade,  by  planting  in  Virginia,  than  to  the  wisdom 
of  schemes  for  prosecuting  subsistence  farming  in  the  north  of 
Ireland.  The  colonists,  who  were  managing  large  estates  and 
raising  tobacco  for  export,  were  in  constant  need  of  labor;  the 
Virginia  Company  and,  after  its  dissolution,  the  agents  of  the 
planters,  were  willing  to  pay  a  good  price  for  servants  of  every 
class;  a  large  business  sprang  up,  both  at  London  and  Bristol, 
in  the  shipment  of  laborers  to  the  plantations. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  a  preference  would  be  given  to  per- 
sons who  had  been  brought  up  in  the  country  and  were  accustomed 
to  out-of-door  employment.  The  young  and  active  men  in  any 
parish,  who  saw  little  prospect  of  getting  a  holding  of  their  own, 
would  possibly  feel  that  they  could  better  themselves  by  emigration, 
though  it  is  not  probable  that  many  adult  servants  in  husbandry 
had  either  the  inclination  or  the  opportunity  to  go  so  far  afield. 
There  was  more  chance  of  drawing  on  the  surplus  population  of 
the  towns,  and  on  those  artisans  who  were  thrown  out  of  work 
by  the  fluctuations  of  their  trade.  It  has  already  been  pointed 
out  that  the  arrangements  which  were  made  for  the  relief  of  the 
poor,  prove  how  very  easily  the  well-doing  and  industrious  persons 
of  this  class  might  be  reduced  to  destitution;  the  rigidity  of  the 
Elizabethan  system,  which  told  alike  against  change  of  residence 


English  Historians 

and  change  of  occupation,  must  have  put  great  obstacles  in  the 
way  of  any  man  obtaining  employment  when  once  he  was  thrown 
out.  Recruits  could  also  be  obtained  from  less  desirable  elements 
of  the  population,  as  there  was  a  constant  desire  on  the  part  of  the 
judges  and  the  government  to  mitigate  the  severity  of  our  penal 
code,  and  to  inflict  sentences  of  transportation  in  many  cases 
where  the  penalty  of  death  had  been  incurred.  The  colonists  did 
their  best  to  protect  themselves  against  the  intrusion  of  criminal 
elements,  as  the  Virginia  Company  had  done  in  its  day.  They 
insisted  that  each  emigrant  should  be  provided  with  a  guarantee 
of  character  and  respectability;  but  these  regulations  could  not 
be  maintained  in  the  face  of  the  great  demand  for  labor. 

§  6.    Transportation  of  Irish  and  Servants 

The  openings  afforded  by  the  colonies  must  have  done  much  to 
relieve  the  country  from  the  after-effects  of  the  disturbances  caused 
by  the  Civil  War.  It  is  in  the  case  of  Ireland  that  we  get  the  fullest 
evidence ;  Cromwell's  campaign  was  ruthless  enough ;  and  those 
of  the  garrison  at  Drogheda,  who  escaped  with  their  lives,  were 
transported  to  the  Barbadoes.  The  scheme  in  which  Parliament 
then  engaged,  for  the  wholesale  planting  of  Ireland  by  Cromwell's 
soldiers,  was  an  ingenious  endeavor  to  get  rid  at  once  of  a  political 
danger  and  of  the  arrears  of  pay.  It  could  not  be  carried  out, 
however,  until  a  wholesale  deportation  of  the  existing  population 
had  been  effected,  and  numbers  of  them  seem  to  have  been  com- 
pulsory immigrants  to  the  plantations.  Similar  measures  were 
taken  with  regard  to  the  Royalist  prisoners  after  the  battle  of 
Worcester,  and  the  possibility  of  getting  rid  of  restive -or  danger- 
ous elements  in  the  population  must  have  contributed  immensely 
to  the  establishment  of  civil  order  once  more. 

When  the  supply  of  prisoners  and  conquered  persons  fell  off, 
however,  there  were  no  legitimate  means  of  keeping  up  the  stream 
of  immigration  or  meeting  the  requirements  of  the  planters,  and  a 
systematic  practice  of  kidnapping  sprang  up,  by  which  large  num- 
bers of  persons  were  spirited  away  to  work  as  servants  in  the  colo- 
nies. The  extent  to  which  this  shameful  traffic  was  carried  on  is 
very  remarkable,  and  interesting  evidence  about  it  is  afforded  by 
the  mention  of  occasional  and  unsuccessful  attempts  to  put  it 
down.  In  1660  John  Clarke  petitioned  for  letters  patent  em- 
powering him  to  keep  a  register  office,  to  which  all  servants  and 
children  might  be  brought  before  being  transported  to  Virginia 


Motives  for  Colonization  433 

and  the  Barbadoes,  so  as  to  prevent  the  abuses  of  forcible  trans- 
portation of  persons  without  their  own  or  their  parents'  consent. 
A  similar  proposal  was  made  in  1664,  and  the  complaints  of  mer- 
chants, planters,  and  masters  of  ships,  as  well  as  of  the  Lord  Mayor 
and  Aldermen  of  London,  show  how  greatly  some  such  institution 
was  required. 


2F 


CHAPTER  H 

• 

DRAKE  AND  THE  CIRCUMNAVIGATION 

AMONG  the  many  Elizabethan  sailors  whose  daring  exploits 
initiated  the  British  struggle  for  world  trade  and  dominion  there 
is  none  more  famous  than  Sir  Francis  Drake.  As  a  Protestant 
seaman,  he  added  religious  zeal  to  his  enthusiasm  for  the  plun- 
der of  Spanish  commerce.  In  a  time  when  the  contest  for  oceanic 
traffic  took  the  form  of  ill-disguised  warfare,  Drake  showed  him- 
self master  of  the  art  of  sailing,  fighting,  and  freebooting.  He 
made  many  bold  and  successful  expeditions,  but  one  of  them  stands 
out  above  all  others  on  account  of  its  uniqueness  and  daring. 
That  is  his  voyage  around  the  world,  on  which  he  set  out  in  1577. 
The  story  of  this  journey  is  told  in  Mr.  Corbett's  little  volume 
on  Drake  from  which  is  taken  the  following  extract  relating  a  part 
of  the  tale  after  the  rounding  of  South  America. 

§  i.  Raiding  Spanish  Shipping1 

Lord  Burleigh's  scheme  had  failed,  and  Drake  was  knocking 
at  the  golden  gates.  In  the  teeth  of  the  astutest  ministers  of  the 
time,  he  was  about  to  blow  the  blast  before  which  the  giant's  doors 
would  fly  open,  and  deliberately  to  goad  the  giant  into  open  fight. 
Full  of  the  momentous  meaning  of  his  resolve,  he  paused  upon  the 
threshold  to  do  honor  to  the  mistress  whose  favor  he  wore.  Be- 
fore the  frowning  entry  he  caused  his  fleet,  in  homage  of  their 
sovereign  lady,  to  strike  their  topsails  upon  the  bunt  as  a  token 
of  his  willingness  and  glad  mind,  and  to  show  his  dutiful  obedience 
to  her  Highness.  It  was  a  piece  of  true  Elizabethan  chivalry,  and 
like  a  true  Elizabethan  knight  he  accompanied  it  with  a  shrewd 
stroke  of  policy.  Sir  Christopher  Hatton  had  now  no  visible 

1  Corbett,  Drake,  chap.  vi.  By  permission  of  Julian  Corbett,  Esq.,  and 
The  Macmillan  Company,  Publishers. 

434 


Drake  and  the  Circumnavigation  435 

connection  with  the  venture.  The  vessel  named  after  him  had 
been  broken  up,  and  his  representative  had  been  beheaded. 
Drake  knew  well  how  flat  fell  prowess  at  the  Faery  Queene's  court 
if  a  man  had  not  a  friend  at  her  ear.  He  knew,  too,  that  no  repu- 
tation was  so  fashionable  just  then  as  that  of  a  patron  of  discoveries, 
nor  could  he  be  ignorant  that  all  the  new  favorite's  good-will 
would  be  required  to  save  him  from  Burleigh's  power.  So  on  the 
poop  of  the  little  flagship  was  placed  the  crest  of  the  Captain  of 
the  Guard,  and  in  his  honor  the  Pelican  became  the  Golden  Hind. 
So  protected,  Drake  boldly  entered  the  straits.  Then  from  the 
towering  snow-cones  and  threatening  glaciers  that  guarded  the  en- 
try the  tempests  swept  down  upon  the  daring  intruders.  Out  of  the 
tortuous  gulfs  that  through  the  bowels  of  the  fabulous  Austral 
continent  seemed  to  lead  beyond  the  confines  of  the  world,  rude 
squalls  buffeted  them  this  way  and  that,  and  currents,  the  like 
of  which  no  man  had  seen,  made  as  though  they  would  dash  them 
to  pieces  in  the  fathomless  depths  where  no  cable  would  reach. 
Fires  lit  by  natives  on  the  desolate  shores  as  the  strangers  strug- 
gled by,  added  the  terrors  of  unknown  magic.  But  Drake's 
fortitude  and  consummate  seamanship  triumphed  over  all,  and 
in  a  fortnight  he  brought  his  ill-sailing  ships  in  triumph  out  upon 
the  Pacific.  Then,  as  though  maddened  to  see  how  the  adven- 
turers had  braved  every  effort  to  destroy  them,  the  whole  fury 
of  the  fiends  that  guarded  the  South  Sea's  slumber  rushed  howling 
upon  them.  Hardly  had  the  squadron  turned  northward  than 
a  terrific  gale  struck  it  and  hurled  it  back.  The  sky  was  darkened, 
and  the  bowels  of  the  earth  seemed  to  have  burst,  and  for  nearly 
two  months  they  were  driven  under  bare  poles  to  and  fro  without 
rest,  in  latitudes  where  no  ship  had  ever  sailed.  On  the  maps 
the  great  Austral  continent  was  marked,  but  they  found  in  its 
place  an  enchanted  void,  where  wind  and  water,  and  ice  and 
darkness,  seemed  to  make  incessant  war.  After  three  weeks' 
strife,  the  Marygold  went  down  with  all  hands;  and  in  another 
week  Wynter  lost  heart,  and  finding  himself  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Straits,  went  home  in  despair;  while  the  Golden  Hind,  ignorant 
of  the  desertion,  was  swept  once  more  to  the  south  of  Cape  Horn. 
Here,  on  the  fifty-third  day  of  its  fury,  the  storm  ceased,  exhausted, 
and  Drake  found  himself  alone.  But  it  was  no  moment  to  repine, 
for  he  knew  he  had  made  a  discovery  so  brilliant  as  to  deprive 
even  Magellan's  of  its  radiance.  He  was  anchored  among  the 
islands  southward  of  anything  known  to  geographers,  and  before 
him  the  Atlantic  and  Pacific  rolled  together  in  one  great  flood. 


43 6  English  Historians       . 

In  his  exultation  he  landed  on  the  farthest  island,  and  walking 
alone  with  his  instruments  to  its  end,  he  laid  himself  down,  and 
with  his  arms  embraced  the  southernmost  point  of  the  known 
world.  .  .  . 

About  a  month  later,  little  dreaming  what  had  taken  place,  the 
crew  of  the  Grand  Captain  of  the  South  were  lazily  waiting  in 
Valparaiso  harbor  for  a  wind  to  carry  them  to  Panama  with  their 
cargo  of  gold  and  Chili  wine.  As  they  lounged  over  the  bulwarks 
a  sail  appeared  to  the  northward,  and  they  made  ready  a  pipe  of 
wine  to  have  a  merry  night  with  the  newcomers.  As  the  stranger 
anchored  they  beat  her  a  welcome  of  their  drum,  and  then  watched 
her  boat  come  alongside.  In  a  moment  all  was  in  confusion. 
A  rough  old  salt  was  laying  about  him  with  his  fists,  shouting  in 
broken  Spanish,  "Down,  dog,  down!"  and  the  astounded  Span- 
iards were  soon  tight  under  hatches.  It  was  Tom  Moone 
at  his  old  work.  Hither  the  Golden  Hind  had  been  piloted  by 
a  friendly  Indian  in  its  search  for  provisions  and  loot.  The  little 
settlement  was  quickly  plundered  of  all  it  had  worth  taking,  and 
Drake's  mariners,  who  for  months  had  been  living  on  salted  pen- 
guin, and  many  of  whom  were  suffering  from  wounds  received  in 
an  encounter  with  the  islanders  of  Mocha,  were  revelling  in  all 
the  dainties  of  the  Chilian  paradise.  For  three  days  the  mysteri- 
ous ship,  which  seemed  to  have  dropped  from  the  skies,  lay  in 
the  harbor  collecting  provisions,  and  then,  laden  with  victuals,  it 
sailed  away  northward  with  its  prize. 

Drake's  great  anxiety  now  was  to  rendezvous  his  scattered  fleet 
for  the  sack  of  Lima  and  Panama,  and  assured  that  Wynter  must 
be  ahead  he  fully  expected  to  find  him  in  30°  north  latitude,  the 
point  agreed  on.  After  an  ineffectual  attempt  to  water  at  Co- 
quimbo,  where  he  found  the  Spaniards  in  arms,  he  discovered  a 
natural  harbor  a  little  north  of  it  which  suited  his  purpose.  In  a 
month  his  preparations  were  complete.  The  men  were  thoroughly 
refreshed ;  a  pinnace  had  been  set  up ;  the  Golden  Hind  refitted 
from  stem  to  stern,  and  under  the  guidance  of  the  pilot  of  the  Grand 
Captain  he  set  out  to  realize  the  dream  of  his  life.  Every  one 
except  perhaps  poor  John  Doughty  was  in  the  highest  spirits. 
The  return  of  health  and  the  glorious  climate  made  them  reckless 
of  the  dangers  of  their  single-handed  attempt.  Still  they  trusted 
to  find  the  Elizabeth,  and  as  they  searched  the  coast  for  water 
with  the  pinnace  they  never  lost  hope  of  hearing  of  her.  Fresh 
plunder  constantly  compensated  for  their  continued  disappoint- 
ment. At  one  point  on  the  coast  of  Tarapaca  they  found  a  Span- 


Drake  and  the   Circumnavigation  437 

iard  asleep  with  thirteen  bars  of  silver  beside  him.  They  apolo- 
gized profusely  for  disturbing  his  nap,  and  politely  insisted  on 
making  amends  by  relieving  him  of  his  burden.  Farther  on  they 
met  another  driving  a  train  of  guanacoes  laden  with  some  eight 
hundred  pounds  of  silver,  and  expressing  themselves  shocked  to 
see  a  gentleman  turned  carrier  they  took  his  place ;  but  somehow, 
as  they  afterwards  said,  they  lost  the  way  to  his  house  and  found 
themselves  suddenly  just  where  they  had  left  the  pinnace. 

So  they  romped  along  that  peaceful  coast,  startling  its  luxurious 
slumbers  with  shouts  of  reckless  laughter  till  they  came  to  Arica, 
the  frontier  town  of  Peru  and  the  point  where  the  fabulous  wealth 
of  the  Potosi  mines  was  embarked  for  Panama.  It  was  a  place 
important  enough  to  have  tempted  the  Elizabeth  from  her  tryst. 
But  not  only  was  no  trace  of  her  to  be  found,  but  so  hot  was  the 
alarm  in  front  of  Drake  that  two  small  treasure-barks  were  all 
there  was  in  the  harbor  to  plunder  and  the  town  was  in  arms. 
A  few  hours  ago  a  galleon  had  escaped  northward,  laden  with 
eight  hundred  bars  of  silver,  all  belonging  to  the  king  cf  Spain, 
and  fuming  to  so  narrowly  miss  his  revenge,  Drake  at  once  resolved 
to  give  chase.  Without  further  care  for  his  consort  or  any  attempt 
on  the  town  he  hurried  on  with  his  pinnace  and  the  Valparaiso 
prize,  till  at  Chuli,  the  port  of  Arequipa,  they  saw  the  chase  at 
anchor.  Her  capture  was  without  a  blow,  for  not  a  man  was 
found  aboard  her  —  nor  a  bar  of  silver  either.  Two  hours  ago 
the  whole  of  it  had  been  heaved  overboard  to  save  it  from  Drake's 
hands,  and  in  a  fury  of  disappointment  he  at  once  set  both  the  slow- 
sailing  prizes  adrift  out  into  the  ocean.  For  he  was  resolved 
by  a  dash  on  Lima  to  outstrip  his  notoriety  at  all  costs,  and  so  once 
more  the  Golden  Hind  and  its  pinnace  spread  their  wings  north- 
ward alone. 

It  was  on  February  15  that,  in  the  dead  of  night,  they  quietly 
entered  Callao  de  Lima.  The  harbor  was  full  of  shipping,  and 
the  pilot  whom  Drake  had  seized  from  a  vessel  outside  was  made 
to  take  him  right  in  among  them.  A  ship  from  Panama  was  enter- 
ing at  the  same  time,  and  as  they  anchored  side  by  side,  a  custom- 
house boat  at  once  put  off  and  nailed  them.  Not  content  to  wait 
till  the  morning,  a  sleepy  officer  boarded  the  Golden  Hind,  and 
before  he  knew  where  he  was  he  tumbled  right  on  the  top  of  a  big 
gun.  Frightened  to  death,  he  was  over  the  side  again  in  a  moment, 
and  his  boat  dashed  away  crying  the  alarm.  The  ship  of  Panama 
cut  her  cables,  and  Drake  slipped  into  the  pinnace  to  take  her, 
but  as  she  showed  fight  he  left  her  for  the  present  and  turned  to 


43 8  English  Historians 

ransack  the  defenceless  shipping  that  lay  around  him.  From 
ship  to  ship  he  went,  but  not  an  ounce  of  treasure  could  he  find. 
It  was  all  ashore  except  a  vast  quantity  which  had  recently  been 
shipped  for  Panama  in  a  large  vessel  called  Our  Lady  of  the  Con- 
ception, and  nicknamed  the  Spitfire.  That  was  enough  for  him. 
He  returned  to  the  Golden  Hind,  left  his  anchorage,  and  as  he 
drifted  out  in  the  calm  which  had  fallen,  he  captured  the  ship 
of  Panama.  But  then  ensued  a  delay  both  exasperating  and  dan- 
gerous. For  three  days  there  was  not  a  breath  of  wind,  and  the 
Viceroy  of  Peru,  marching  down  from  Lima  with  two  thousand 
troops,  sent  out  four  vessels  to  capture  or  burn  the  rover  as  he  lay 
becalmed.  All  was  in  vain.  Ere  they  found  heart  to  close  with 
the  terrible  stranger  the  breeze  sprang  up  and  away  he  went  in 
hot  pursuit  of  the  treasure-ship.  It  had  fourteen  days'  start  of 
him,  but  he  did  not  despair,  and  while  the  Viceroy  was  solemnly 
casting  guns  to  arm  vessels  to  pursue  him,  Drake  was  ransacking 
ship  after  ship  for  treasure  and  news  of  the  chase.  She  had  stopped 
at  Truxillo  to  load  more  bullion,  and  each  prize  told  him  he  was 
overhauling  her.  At  Paita  he  learned  she  had  sailed  but  two 
days  before.  The  scent  was  now  hot  indeed.  Exasperated  to 
miss  his  prey  so  narrowly,  the  admiral  promised  a  golden  chain 
to  the  man  who  first  sighted  her,  and  swore  she  should  be  his, 
though  he  tore  her  from  her  moorings  at  Panama  itself.  Across 
the  line  they  raced  and  ctill  no  sight  of  her,  till  on  March  i  off 
Cape  San  Francisco  young  John  Drake,  his  page  and  nephew, 
claimed  the  reward.  Fearful  of  alarming  his  quarry,  Drake  at 
once  ordered  casks  to  be  trailed  astern,  and  so  managed  to  keep 
hull  down  till  nightfall.  Then  the  Golden  Hind  was  slipped,  and 
in  one  bound  rushed  alongside  her  prey.  A  single  shot  brought 
her  to  reason,  and  then  side  by  side  the  two  ships  ran  westwards 
for  three  days  into  the  silent  wastes  of  the  Pacific.  For  three  days 
more  they  lay  together,  and  when  they  parted  there  were  added 
to  Drake's  treasure  thirteen  chests  of  pieces  of  eight,  eighty  pounds' 
weight  of  gold,  jewels  untold,  and  the  Golden  Hind  was  literacy 
ballasted  with  silver. 

So  huge  was  the  booty  that  the  only  thought  was  home.  To 
attempt  Panama  single-handed  wo'uld  in  any  case  have  been  mad- 
ness, and  Drake  resolved  to  return,  but  not  by  the  way  he  came. 
The  great  discoveries  he  had  already  made  did  not  satisfy  his 
greed  for  renown.  He  had  swept  one  whole  continent  from  the 
globe ;  by  his  survey  of  the  coast  of  Chili  he  had  for  the  first  time 
determined  the  shape  of  another ;  and  now  he  was  minded  to  settle 


Drake  and  the  Circumnavigation  439 

forever  the  question  of  the  North  West  passage.  From  the 
Atlantic  his  rivals  were  seeking  the  fabulous  Strait  of  Anian,  and 
by  that  channel,  if  it  existed,  he  determined  to  find  his  way  home. 
His  daring  resolve  completely  outwitted  the  Spaniards.  The 
Viceroy  of  Peru  sent  his  most  brilliant  officer,  Don  Pedro  Sar- 
miente  de  Gamboa,  in  pursuit.  He  sought  the  rover  towards 
Panama,  but  he  was  not  there.  Still  ignorant  that  it  was  not  the 
only  passage  between  the  two  oceans,  he  turned  to  bar  the  way 
at  the  Straits  of  Magellan,  and  Drake  was  not  there.  But  far 
away,  in  his  palace  at  Mexico,  Don  Martin  Enriquez,  the  per- 
jured Viceroy  who  eleven  years  ago  had  broken  his  word  at  Vera 
Cruz,  had  news  in  plenty.  Mocking  greetings  from  his  unknown 
enemy  disturbed  his  ease,  and  he  had  to  read  news  from  the  Nicara- 
guan  coast  that  sorted  ill  with  a  quiet  siesta.  There  a  corsair, 
the  like  of  whom  no  man  had  seen,  had  been  at  work.  His 
prisoners  had  found  him  surrounded  by  a  council  of  the  younger 
sons  of  the  first  men  in  England,  who  always  approached  him 
hat  in  hand  and  stood  in  his  presence.  He  dined  in  state  to  the 
sound  of  violins,  and  his  crew,  whose  discipline  filled  the  Spaniards 
with  amazement,  adored  him.  He  was  a  martinet,  and  took  no 
man's  advice,  but  he  heard  all  alike  and  had  no  favorite.  He  had 
artificers  of  every  kind,  and  at  the  Isle  of  Cano  had  just  careened 
and  refitted  his  ship,  God  and  his  saints  only  knew  for  what  fresh 
depredations.  He  had  cartographers  who  were  making  charts 
of  the  coast  as  he  went,  so  that  whole  fleets  might  follow  in  his 
track.  And  as  for  catching  him,  so  well  armed  and  so  fast  was 
his  ship  that  that  was  out  of  the  question.  The  whole  coast  of 
New  Spain  was  in  a  fever  of  alarm,  for  they  knew  it  was  the  same 
Drake,  the  cousin  of  Aquinez,  who  five  years  ago  had  raided 
Nombre  de  Dios.  The  Bishop  of  Guatemala  began  melting  his 
chimes  into  guns,  ships  were  fitted  out,  and  troops  moved  up  and 
down.  In  a  month  they  expected  to  be  ready  to  take  the  sea, 
^Vr*  in  &  week  Drake  had  done  his  work.  Swooping  on  the  port 
of  Guatulco,  he  had  found  the  court  sitting,  carried  off  all  the  judges 
bodily  to  his  ship,  and  then  made  them  send  an  order  for  every 
man  to  leave  the  town.  This  done,  he  revictualled  at  his  ease 
from  the  Spanish  storehouses,  and  next  day  he  was  away  once 
more.  He  had  less  idea  of  staying  than  ever;  for,  lurking  off 
(he  coast  of  Nicaragua,  on  the  track  of  the  China  trade,  he  had 
made  a  capture  of  greater  value  than  all  his  treasures.  It  was 
a  vessel  on  which  were  sailing  two  China  pilots,  and  now  snug 
in  the  cabin  of  Spain's  arch-enemy  were  the  whole  of  the  secret 


44°  English   Historians 

charts  by  which  was  conducted  the  rich  Spanish  trade  across  the 
Pacific. 

§  2.   The  Northern  Voyage 

For  Spain  it  was  a  disaster  of  which  no  man  could  see  the  end, 
and,  hugging  his  inestimable  treasures,  Drake  sped  northward 
to  find  his  way  back  into  the  Atlantic.  By  the  first  week  in  June 
he  had  reached  close-hauled  on  the  northeast  trade  as  high  as 
the  latitude  of  Cape  Mendocino ;  but  here  he  was  suddenly  caught 
in  a  storm  of  extraordinary  severity.  His  rigging  was  frozen,  his 
crew  were  half-paralyzed.  Still  he  struggled  on,  firing  his  men 
with  his  own  hot  courage.  In  two  days  more  he  reached  the  lati- 
tude of  Vancouver,  and  there  he  gave  up  the  struggle.  The  land 
still  trended  westward,  the  weather  grew  more  and  more  severe, 
and  he  made  up  his  mind  that  if  the  passage  existed  it  was  imprac- 
ticable. So  the  great  resolve  was  taken,  and  running  south  to 
find  a  port  to  prepare  the  Golden  Hind  for  her  tremendous  effort, 
he  put  into  a  natural  harbor  near  San  Francisco,  where  the  cliffs 
were  white  like  those  at  home,  and  the  soil  was  teeming  with  gold. 
As  fort  and  dockyard  rose  by  their  lonely  shores,  the  Indians 
gathered  in  wonder  and  would  have  worshipped  the  strangers  as 
beings  from  a  better  land.  The  horrified  Puritans  protested  as 
kindly  as  they  might,  and  when  persuaded  Drake  was  human, 
the  simple  savages  crowned  him  in  his  mistress's  name  king  of 
New  Albion.  So  at  least  the  old  navigators  understood  the  strange 
ceremonies  with  which  the  month  of  their  stay  was  occupied ;  and 
the  loud  lamentations  of  their  friends  when  they  departed  filled 
their  imaginations  with  visions  of  an  empire  of  Englishmen  hardly 
less  grand  than  the  great  reality. 

§  3.  Across  the  Pacific 

It  was  on  July  25  that,  with  a  boldness  we  can  hardly  realize, 
the  course  was  laid  direct  for  the  Moluccas.  Their  instruments 
for  finding  latitude  were  far  from  perfect ;  longitude  it  was  prac- 
tically impossible  for  them  to  determine  at  all;  their  logs  were 
so  distrusted  that  as  a  rule  they  preferred  to  guess  the  runs ;  and 
the  variation  of  the  compass  was  ascertained  with  childish  crude- 
ness.  Yet  Drake  did  not  even  condescend  to  follow  the  beaten 
trade-track  of  the  Spaniards  along  the  ninth  parallel.  But  straight 
across  the  Pacific,  from  where  he  was  to  where  he  wished  to  be, 
he  pushed  his  way  as  it  were  by  inspiration.  For  sixty-eight  days 


Drake  and  the  Circumnavigation  441 

they  had  no  sight  of  land.  By  the  end  of  September  they  found 
themselves  close  to  the  equator,  and  turning  to  the  northward  to 
avoid  the  counter-current,  on  the  last  day  of  the  month  they  ran 
in  amongst  the  Carolines. 

The  rest  is  long  to  tell :  how,  getting  clear  of  the  pilfering  natives, 
Drake  made  the  Philippines,  and  coasting  along  them  ran  from 
the  southern  point  of  Mindanao  through  theTalautse  group  and 
past  Togolando  to  the  Moluccas;  how  at  Ternate  he  made  an 
exclusive  commercial  treaty  with  the  king  which,  for  a  century 
afterwards,  was  the  sheet-anchor  of  our  diplomatists  in  their  quar- 
rels with  the  Dutch  and  Portuguese  about  the  East  Indian  trade; 
how  he  careened  again  at  an  island  near  the  Greyhound  Strait, 
and  then,  after  trying  to  beat  northward  into  the  Macassar  channel, 
turned  back  to  pass  southward,  and  was  at  once  entangled  in  the 
reef-encumbered  seas  that  wash  the  eastern  coasts  of  Celebes; 
and  how,  after  escaping  a  thousand  dangers  in  the  first  days  of  the 
year  1580,  as  they  were  sailing  along  the  south  of  Peling  Island 
with  a  fine  topsail  breeze,  they  ran  full  tilt  on  a  reef.  There  for 
twenty  hours  they  lay  at  the  mercy  of  God.  All  around  was  deep 
sea,  where  no  hold  could  be  got  for  warping.  Every  shift  was 
tried,  but  not  an  inch  would  the  treasure-laden  vessel  stir,  and  death 
only  grew  more  real  before  them.  Hopeless  and  exhausted,  they 
desisted  from  their  efforts,  and  in  solemn  preparation  for  the  end, 
took  the  sacrament  together.  Then  in  the  good  old  Puritan  fash- 
ion, to  aid  the  Lord,  Drake  made  jettison  of  guns  and  spices  worth 
their  weight  in  silver,  till  lo !  in  the  midst  of  their  pious  labor  the 
wind  changed,  and,  like  the  breath  of  the  Saviour  in  answer  to 
their  prayers,  gently  slid  them  from  the  rock.  It  was  the  gravest 
danger  of  all  their  voyage,  and  for  nearly  two  months  more,  as 
they  groped  their  way  about  the  Floris  Sea  and  struggled  with 
baffling  gales,  they  hourly  expected  its  recurrence.  But  every 
peril  was  overcome  at  last,  and  in  March  they  were  well  clear 
of  the  Archipelago,  and  with  thankful  hearts  refitting,  cleaning, 
and  victualling  in  a  southern  port  of  Java.  So  the  great  exploit 
was  accomplished,  and  the  prayer  uttered  so  devoutly  six  years 
ago  upon  the  giant  tree  in  Darien  was  more  than  fulfilled.  God 
had  given  his  supplicant  life  and  leave  to  sail  the  South  Sea  in  an 
English  ship,  and  he  had  sailed  it  from  side  to  side.  Its  secret 
was  England's  at  last;  and,  laden  with  its  wealth,  in  two  months 
more  the  triumphant  explorer  was  ploughing  his  homeward  way 
towards  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope. 


442  English   Historians 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Corbett,  Drake  and  the  English  Navy.  Payne,  Elizabethan  Seamen. 
Innes,  England  under  the  Tudors,  chap,  xxiii.  Froude,  The  Elizabethan 
Seamen  in  the  Sixteenth  Century.  Lee,  Source  Book  of  English  History, 
pp.  316  ff.  for  contemporary  accounts  of  Elizabethan  seamen. 


CHAPTER   III 

RISE   OF   BRITISH   DOMINION  IN  INDIA 

THE  rise  of  British  dominion  in  India  under  the  management 
of  a  trading  company  has  been  regarded  by  many  writers  as  one 
of  the  wonders  of  history;  but  a  careful  examination  of  the  condi- 
tions in  India  and  the  steps  by  which  British  power  was  built  up 
makes  the  whole  process  clear  and  simple.  The  rich  trade  of 
the  East  which  first  attracted  British  merchants  was  older  than 
the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great,  but  it  was  not  until  1498  that  the 
Portuguese  under  Vasco  da  Gama  found  a  water  route  around 
Africa  to  India.  For  almost  one  hundred  years  the  Portuguese 
enjoyed  the  immense  profits  of  this  commerce,  but  in  1591  the 
English  sent  an  expedition  to  trade  on  their  own  account.  Four 
years  later  Dutch  merchants  despatched  their  first  expedition  and 
the  three  powers  soon  entered  into  a  heated  rivalry  for  trading 
advantages.  In  this  bitter  contest,  the  Portuguese  were  van- 
quished, the  Dutch  triumphed  in  the  Spice  Islands,  and  the  Eng- 
glish  confined  their  enterprises  largely  to  the  mainland  of  India. 
In  1667  the  French  joined  in  the  race  for  Eastern  markets  and  by 
the  opening  of  the  eighteenth  century  had  secured  several  important 
posts  in  India.  This  trade  rivalry  was  shortly  transformed  into 
a  contest  for  dominion,  and  to  understand  this  one  must  examine 
the  local  situation  in  India. 

When  the  English  first  went  to  India,  that  country  was  ruled 
by  a  mighty  Mohammedan  Moghul,  whose  ancestors  had  conquered 
the  native  population  and  founded  a  great  empire.  As  long  as 
powerful  Moghuls  succeeded  one  another,  the  European  traders 
were  secure  in  their  operation,  and  the  possibilities  of  conquest 
were  slight.  However,  in  1707,  the  last  of  the  great  Moghuls, 
Aurangzeb,  died  and  his  dominions  began  to  go  to  pieces  under 

443 


444  English   Historians 

the  weak  rule  of  his  successors.  Shortly  the  English  and  French 
opened  a  contest  for  the  dismemberment  of  the  ancient  empire  in 
which  the  latter  were  overthrown  during  the  Seven  Years'  War. 
Finally,  the  English  were  compelled  to  war  with  the  native  and 
Mohammedan  princes,  and  step  by  step  they  wrested  from  them 
the  fragments  of  the  disintegrating  empire.  This  whole  story  is 
told  in  a  clear  and  readable  fashion  by  Sir  Alfred  Lyall,  in  his  Rise 
of  British  Dominion  in  India. 

§  i.     Two  Periods  in  the  Growth  of  British  Power1 

The  rise  and  territorial  expansion  of  the  English  power  may 
be  conveniently  divided  into  two  periods,  which  slightly  overlap 
each  other,  but  on  the  whole  mark  two  distinct  and  consecutive 
stages  in  the  construction  of  our  dominion.  The  first  is  the  period 
when  the  contest  lay  among  the  European  nations,  who  began  by 
competing  for  commercial  advantages,  and  ended  by  fighting 
for  political  superiority  on  the  Indian  littoral.  The  commercial 
competition  was  going  on  throughout  the  whole  of  the  seventeenth 
century;  but  the  struggle  with  the  French,  which  laid  the  founda- 
tion of  our  dominion,  lasted  less  than  twenty  years,  for  it  began 
in  1745,  and  was  virtually  decided  in  1763. 

The  second  period  upon  which  we  are  now  about  to  enter  is 
that  during  which  England  was  contending  with  the  native  Indian 
powers,  not  for  commercial  preponderance  or  for  strips  of  territory 
and  spheres  of  influence  along  the  seaboard,  but  for  supremacy 
over  all  India.  Reckoning  the  beginning  of  this  contest  from 
1756,  when  Clive  and  Admiral  Watson  sailed  from  Madras  to 
recover  Calcutta  from  the  Nawdb  of  Bengal,  it  may  be  taken  to 
have  been  substantially  determined  in  fifty  years;  although  for  an- 
other fifty  years  the  expansion  of  our  territory  went  on  by  great 
strides,  with  long  halts  intervening,  until  the  natural  limits  of 
India  were  attained  by  the  conquest  of  Sinde  and  the  Punjab. 

§  2.   Explanation  of  the  Easy  Conquest  of  India 

The  first  thing  that  must  .strike  the  ordinary  observer  on  looking 
back  over  the  hundred  years  from  1757  to  1857,  during  which  the 

1  Lyall,  The  Rise  of  British  Dominion  in  India,  pp.  98  ff.  By  permis- 
sion of  Charles  Scribner's  Sons,  Publishers. 


Rise  of  British   Dominion  in   India          445 

acquisition  of  our  Indian  dominion  has  been  accomplished,  is 
the  magnitude  of  the  exploit ;  the  next  is  the  remarkable  ease  with 
which  it  was  achieved.  At  the  present  moment,  when  the  English 
survey  from  their  small  island  in  the  West  the  immense  Eastern 
empire  that  has  grown  up  out  of  their  petty  trading  settlements 
on  the  Indian  seaboard,  they  are  apt  to  be  struck  with  wonder  and 
a  kind  of  dismay  at  the  prospering  of  their  own  handiwork.  The 
thing  is,  as  has  been  said,  so  unprecedented  in  history,  and  par- 
ticularly it  is  so  entirely  unfamiliar  to  modern  political  ideas,  — 
we  have  become  so  unaccustomed  in  the  Western  world  to  build 
up  empires  in  the  high  Roman  fashion,  —  that  even  those  who 
have  studied  the  beginnings  of  our  Indian  dominion  are  inclined 
to  treat  the  outcome  and  climax  as  something  passing  man's  under- 
standing. Our  magnificent  possessions  are  commonly  regarded 
as  a  man  might  look  at  a  great  prize  he  had  drawn  by  luck  in  a 
lottery;  they  are  supposed  to  have  been  won  by  incalculable 
chance. 

But  it  may  be  fairly  argued  that  this  view,  which  embodies  the 
general  impression  on  this  subject,  can  be  controverted  by  known 
facts.  The  idea  that  India  might  be  easily  conquered  and  gov- 
erned, with  a  very  small  force,  by  a  race  superior  in  warlike  capac- 
ity or  in  civilization,  was  no  novelty  at  all.  In  the  first  place, 
the  thing  had  actually  been  done  once  already.  The  Emperor 
Baber,  who  invaded  India  from  central  Asia  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  has  left  us  his  authentic  memoirs;  it  is  a  book  of  great 
historical  interest,  and  nothing  more  amusing  has  ever  been  writ- 
ten by  an  Asiatic.  He  says :  "When  I  invaded  the  country  for  the 
fifth  time,  overthrew  Sultan  Ibrahim,  and  subdued  the  empire 
of  Hindusthan,  my  servants,  the  merchants  and  their  servants, 
and  the  followers  of  all  friends  that  were  in  camp  along  with  me, 
were  numbered,  and  they  amounted  to  twelve  thousand  men.  I 
placed  my  foot,"  he  writes,  "in  the  stirrup  of  resolution,  and  my 
hands  in  the  reins  of  confidence  in  God  —  and  I  marched  against 
the  possessions  of  the  throne  of  Delhi  and  the  dominions  of  Hin- 
dusthan whose  army  was  said  to  amount  to  one  hundred  thou- 
sand foot,  with  more  than  one  thousand  elephants.  The  Most 
High  God,"  he  adds,  "did  not  suffer  the  hardships  that  I  had 
undergone  to  be  thrown  away,  but  defeated  my  formidable 
enemy  and  made  me  conqueror  of  this  noble  country." 

This  was  done  in  1526;  Baber's  victory  at  Paniput  gave  him 
the  mastery  of  all  northern  India  and  founded  the  Moghul  empire. 
He  had  really  accomplished  the  enterprise  with  smaller  means  and 


446  English  Historians 

resources  than  those  possessed  by  the  English  when  they  had  fixed 
themselves  securely  in  Bengal  with  a  base  on  the  sea ;  and  the  great 
host  which  he  routed  at  Paniput  was  a  far  more  formidable  army 
than  the  English  ever  encountered  in  India  until  they  met  the 
Sikhs.  Now  what  had  been  done  before  could  be  done  again, 
and  was  indeed  likely  to  be  done  again.  So  when  at  the  opening 
of  the  eighteenth  century  the  Moghul  empire  was  evidently  de- 
clining towards  a  fall,  and  people  were  speculating  upon  what 
might  come  after  it,  we  find  floating  in  the  minds  of  cool  observers 
the  idea  that  the  next  conquest  of  India  might  possibly  be  made 
by  Europeans.  . 

§  3.   Early  European  Views  of  tlte  Situation  in  India 

The  keynote  had  indeed  been  struck  earlier  by  Bernier,  a  French 
physician  at  the  court  of  Aurangzeb,  towards  the  close  of  the  seven- 
teenth century,  who  writes  in  his  book  that  M.  de  Cond£  or  M.  de 
Turenne  with  twenty  thousand  men  could  conquer  all  India ;  and 
who  in  his  letter  to  Colbert  lays  particular  stress  first  on  the  riches, 
secondly  on  the  weakness  of  Bengal.  But  in  1746  one  Colonel 
James  Mill,  who  had  been  twenty  years  in  India,  submitted  to  the 
Austrian  Emperor  a  scheme  for  conquering  Bengal  as  a  very  feasible 
and  profitable  undertaking.  "The  whole  country  of  Hindusthan," 
he  says,  "or  empire  of  the  Great  Moghul,  is,  and  ever  has  been, 
in  a  state  so  feeble  and  defenceless  that  it  is  almost  a  miracle  that 
no  prince  of  Europe,  with  a  maritime  power  at  command,  has  not 
as  yet  thought  of  making  such  acquisitions  there  as  at  one  stroke 
would  put  him  and  his  subjects  in  possession  of  infinite  wealth.  .  .  . 
The  policy  of  the  Moghul  is  bad,  his  military  worse,  and  as  to  a 
maritime  power  to  command  and  protect  his  coasts,  he  has  none 
at  all.  .  .  .  The  province  of  Bengal  is  at  present  under  the  do- 
minion of  a  rebel  subject  of  the  Moghul,  whose  annual  revenue 
amounts  to  about  two  millions.  But  Bengal,  though  not  to  be 
reduced  by  the  power  of  the  Moghul,  is  equally  indefensible  with 
the  rest  of  Hindusthan  on  the  side  of  the  ocean,  and  consequently 
may  be  forced  out  of  the  rebel's  hand  with  all  its  wealth,  which  is 
incredibly  vast."  If  we  bear  in  mind  how  little  could  have  been 
accurately  known  of  India  as  a  whole  by  an  Englishman  in  1746, 
we  must  give  Colonel  Mill  credit  for  much  sagacity  and  insight 
into  the  essential  facts  of  the  situation.  He  discerns  the  central 
points;  he  places  his  finger  upon  the  elementary  causes  of  India's 
permanent  weakness,  her  political  instability  within,  and  her  sea- 
coast  exposed  and  undefended  externally. 


Rise  of  British   Dominion  in   India          447 


§  4.    The  British  in  the  Province  of  Bengal 

In  the  year  1716  the  English,  whose  trading  factories  had  long 
been  established  in  Bengal,  obtained  from  the  Moghul  Emperor 
an  important  firman,  or  imperial  order,  permitting  them  to  import 
and  export  goods  upon  payment  of  a  fixed  tribute,  and  protecting 
them  from  the  heavy  and  arbitrary  taxes  laid  on  them  at  the  caprice 
of  the  Nawabs.  Bengal  was  a  province  under  a  governor  whose 
ordinary  title  was  the  Nawab  Nazim,  who  held  office  during  the 
pleasure  of  the  Emperor,  and  who  was  frequently  changed,  so  long 
as  the  empire  was  in  its  vigor,  lest  he  should  become  too  strong 
for  the  central  authority.  But  as  the  power  of  the  Emperor  de- 
clined the  independence  of  the  Nawabs  increased  in  this  distant 
province,  until  in  the  eighteenth  century,  when  Maratha  insur- 
rections and  the  irruptions  from  central  Asia  multiplied  the  dis- 
tractions of  the  State,  the  Bengal  governors  paid  little  obedience 
and  less  revenue  to  Delhi. 

Under  Murshid  Kuli  Khan,  a  man  of  considerable  ability,  the 
governorship  became  in  the  usual  fashion  hereditary;  but  in  1742 
his  grandson  was  overthrown  and  slain  by  Aliverdi  Khan,  an  Afghan 
adventurer  who  raised  himself  from  a  very  humble  post  to  be 
deputy-governor  of  Behar,  and  who  won  for  himself  by  the  sword 
the  rulership  of  Bengal.  During  the  fourteen  years  of  his  strong 
administration  the  foreign  merchants  had  no  great  reason  to  com- 
plain; for  although  he  levied  large  subsidies  from  the  English, 
French,  and  Dutch  factories,  he  gave  them  protection  and  enforced 
good  order,  suppressing  all  quarrels  and  tolerating  no  encroach- 
ments. On  his  death,  in  1756,  he  was  succeeded  by  his  adopted 
son,  known  in  English  histories  as  Suraj-ud-daulah,  a  young  man, 
whose  savage  and  suspicious  temper  was  controlled  by  no  experience 
or  natural  capacity  for  rulership,  and  who  had  long  been  jealous 
of  the  English,  whom  he  suspected  of  having  corresponded  with 
a  possible  rival  against  him  for  the  succession. 

§  5.    The  Black  Hole  0}  Calcutta 

The  new  Naw£b  had  just  been  proclaimed  when  letters  reached 
Calcutta  from  England  informing  the  president  that  as  war  with 
France  was  expected  he  should  put  his  settlement  in  a  state  of 
defence,  whereupon  he  began  to  strengthen  the  fortifications. 
But  the  right  to  fortify  their  places  had  not  been  conceded  to  the 


448  English   Historians 

English  in  Bengal;  and  the  Nawdb,  to  whom  some  offence  had 
previously  been  given  by  the  abrupt  dismissal  of  a  messenger, 
sternly  ordered  them  at  once  to  desist.  The  English  president, 
Drake,  not  understanding  his  danger,  answered  by  explaining 
that  his  fortifications  were  against  the  French,  who  had  disregarded 
the  neutrality  of  the  Moghul's  dominions  in  the  last  war  by  taking 
Madras,  and  who  might  this  time  attack  Calcutta.  This  reply 
SuraJ-ud-daulah  took  to  mean  that  his  protection  and  sovereign 
authority  were  very  lightly  regarded  by  the  foreigners.  In  great 
indignation  he  seized  the  factory  at  Kasimbazar,  near  his  capital, 
and  marched  with  a  large  army  upon  Calcutta.  The  English 
defended  themselves  for  a  time;  but  the  town  was  open,  the  gov- 
ernor and  many  of  the  English  fled  in  ships  down  the  river,  and 
the  rest  surrendered  on  promise  of  honorable  treatment.  Yet 
those  whom  the  Naw£b  captured  with  the  fort  were  thrown  into 
a  kind  of  prison-room  called  the  Black  Hole,  from  which,  after 
one  night's  dreadful  suffering,  only  twenty-three  out  of  one  hun- 
dred and  forty-six  emerged  alive. 

§  6.    Clive  and  the  Battle  of  Plassey 

As  soon  as  the  news  of  this  dismal  catastrophe  reached  Madras, 
the  president  lost  no  time  in  despatching  the  fleet,  commanded  by 
Admiral  Watson,  to  Bengal,  with  troops  under  Colonel  Clive. 
The  force  was  calculated  to  be  sufficient  not  only  for  retaking 
Calcutta,  but  also  for  reducing  Hooghly,  expelling  the  French 
from  Chandernagore,  and  even  for  attempting  the  Nawab's  capi- 
tal at  Murshidabdd ;  and  Clive  set  out,  as  he  wrote,  "with  the  full 
intention  of  settling  the  Company's  estate  in  those  parts  in  a  better 
and  more  lasting  condition  than  ever."  He  had  less  reason,  he 
added,  to  apprehend  a  check  from  the  NawaVs  army  than  from 
the  country  and  the  climate.  Nor  indeed  does  it  apj>ear  that  any 
serious  misgivings  as  to  the  result  of  the  expedition  troubled  the 
government  at  Madras,  where  they  were  only  anxious  to  get  the 
business  done  in  Bengal  before  the  French  armament  under  Lally 
should  arrive  on  the  Coromandel  coast.  Clive  lost  no  time  in 
driving  the  enemy's  garrison  out  of  Calcutta ;  and  when  the  Nawdb 
himself  marched  down  .to  encounter  him,  an  indecisive  engage- 
ment took  place,  followed  by  a  truce  which  was  very  soon  broken. 
Watson  and  Clive  carried  by  assault  the  intrenched  station  of  the 
French  at  Chandernagore ;  but  the  Nawab,  who  at  first  acquiesced, 
at  the  last  moment  withdrew  his  consent  to  the  attack,  and  he  was 


Rise  of  British  Dominion  in   India          449 

secretly  inviting  Bussy  to  march  from  Hyderabad  to  his  relief. 
There  could  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  Suraj-ud-daulah  would 
renew  hostilities  on  the  first  opportunity,  while  on  the  other  hand, 
Lally's  expedition  must  soon  reach  the  eastern  coast,  and  the 
Madras  government  was  urgently  pressing  for  the  return  of  the 
troops. 

The  English  in  Bengal  thus  found  themselves  in  a  perilous 
dilemma,  since  the  troops  could  not  return  to  Madras  until  Cal- 
cutta had  been  in  some  way  placed  beyond  danger  from  the  Nawab. 
When,  therefore,  overtures  were  received  from  certain  disaffected 
chiefs  of  the  Nawab's  court,  Clive  entered  into  a  compact  to  de- 
throne Suraj-ud-daulah,  and  to  set  up  in  his  stead  Meer  Jafir, 
one  of  the  principal  conspirators.  He  then  marched  up  the  coun- 
try against  the  Nawab,  whom  he  found  intrenched  at  Plassey 
with  about  fifteen  thousand  cavalry,  thirty  thousand  foot,  and 
forty  pieces  of  cannon.  The  engagement  began  with  some  can- 
nonading, in  which  a  battery  managed  by  Frenchmen  gave  much 
annoyance  to  the  English.  But  as  soon  as  the  French  had  been 
dislodged  and  some  rising  ground  occupied  that  commanded  the 
interior  of  the  enemy's  fortified  camp,  Clive  delivered  his  assault 
at  one  angle;  whereupon  the  Nawab  fled,  and  his  whole  army 
dispersed  in  a  general  rout,  leaving  on  the  field  its  camp  equipage, 
its  artillery,  and  about  five  hundred  men.  Clive's  despatch  re- 
ports the  loss  on  his  side  to  have  been  twenty-two  killed  and  fifty 
wounded.  Next  morning  Meer  Jafir,  who  had  merely  hovered 
about  the  flanks  of  the  engagement  with  a  large  body  of  cavalry, 
paid  a  visit  to  Clive,  was  saluted  as  Nawab,  and  hastened  to  occupy 
the  capital,  Murshidabad,  where  he  soon  after  put  to  death  Suraj- 
ud-daulah.  The  whole  province  quietly  submitted  to  the  new 
ruler;  the  Emperor's  government  at  Delhi,  which  was  just  then 
occupied  by  Ahmed  Shah  with  an  Afghan  army,  was  totally  in- 
capable of  interference,  so  that  by  this  sudden  and  violent  revo- 
lution the  English  ascendency  became  at  once  established  in  Bengal. 

§  7.    The  Native  Armies  of  the  Period 

The  rout  of  Plassey  —  for  it  can  hardly  be  called  a  battle  — 
is  in  itself  chiefly  remarkable  as  the  first  important  occasion  upon 
which  the  East  India  Company's  troops  were  openly  arrayed, 
not  as  auxiliaries,  but  as  principals  against  a  considerable  native 
army  commanded  in  person  by  the  ruler  of  a  great  province.  It 
stands,  in  fact,  first  on  the  long  list  of  regular  actions  that  have 

2G 


450  English   Historians 

been  fought  between  the  English  in  India  and  the  chiefs  or  mili- 
tary leaders  of  the  country.  The  event  supplies,  therefore,  a 
very  striking  illustration  of  the  radical  weakness  of  those  native 
governments  and  armies  to  whom  the  English  found  themselves 
opposed  in  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century.  This  inherent 
feebleness  of  our  adversaries,  the  inability  to  govern  or  defend 
their  possessions,  obviously  explains  why  the  English,  who  could 
do  both,  so  rapidly  made  room  for  themselves  in  a  country  which, 
though  rich  and  populous,  was  in  a  practical  sense  masterless. 
It  must  also  be  remembered  that  Bengal  and  the  other  provinces 
bordering  on  the  sea  in  which  the  English  won  these  facile  triumphs 
were  far  more  defenceless  than  the  inland  country,  partly  through 
the  dilapidation  of  the  central  power,  partly  because  the  people 
of  those  tracts  are  naturally  less  warlike  than  elsewhere,  and 
partly  by  the  accident  that  they  were  just  then  very  ill-governed. 
The  army  of  the  later  Moghul  emperors  had  always  been  bad; 
yet  until  Aurangzeb  died  it  was  quite  strong  enough  to  repulse 
any  small  expeditionary  force  descending  upon  the  coast.  Nor 
could  such  a  stroke  as  Clive's  at  Plassey  have  been  attempted  with 
impunity  if  Bengal  had  happened  to  possess  a  vigorous  and  capa- 
ble viceroy;  for  a  few  years  later  our  first  campaigns  against  Hyder 
Ali  in  the  south  and  the  Marathas  in  the  west  showed  us  that  under 
competent  leadership  the  superior  numbers  of  an  Indian  army 
might  make  it  a  very  dangerous  antagonist. 

We  have  to  understand,  then,  that  our  earliest  victories  were 
over  troops  that  were  little  better  than  a  rabble  of  hired  soldiers, 
without  coherence  or  loyalty.  An  Indian  army  of  that  period 
was  usually  an  agglomeration  of  mercenaries  collected  by  the  cap- 
tains of  companies  who  supplied  men  to  any  one  able  to  pay  for 
them,  having  enlisted  them  at  random  out  of  the  swarm  of  roving 
free-lances  and  swordsmen,  chiefly  Asiatic  foreigners,  by  whom 
all  India  was  infested.  These  bands  had  no  better  stomach  for 
serious  fighting  than  the  condottieri  of  Italy  in  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury ;  the  close  fire  of  European  musketry  was  more  than  they  had 
bargained  for;  and  artillery  properly  served,  they  could  not  face 
at  all.  Moreover  their  leaders  changed  sides  without  scruple, 
and  were  constantly  plotting  either  to  betray  or  supplant  their 
employers.  It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  if  troops  of  this  kind 
were  such  exceedingly  perilous  weapons  in  timid  or  maladroit 
hands,  that  the  prince,  governor,  or  usurper  who  had  retained  their 
services  often  went  into  action  with  a  very  uncomfortable  distrust 
of  his  best  regiments.  In  the  eighteenth  century  most  of  the 


Rise  of  British   Dominion  in   India          451 

revolted  provinces  of  the  empire  had  been  appropriated  by  suc- 
cessful captains  of  these  mercenaries,  among  whom  the  best 
fighting  men  were  the  Afghans.  Their  most  celebrated  leader  was 
Ahmed  Shah,  the  Abdallee,  a  mighty  warrior  of  the  Afghan  nation, 
and  the  only  great  Asiatic  soldier  who  appeared  in  India  during 
the  eighteenth  century. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Hunter,  History  of  India,  unfortunately  broken  off  at  the  opening 
of  the  eighteenth  century ;  A  Brief  History  of  the  Indian  Peoples,  chap,  x, 
on  "The  Mughal  Dynasty."  Innes,  A  Short  History  of  the  British 
in  India.  Malleson,  History  of  the  French  in  India;  Final  French 
Struggles  in  India;  and  The  Founders  of  the  Indian  Empire.  Seeley, 
Expansion  of  England,  pp.  207  ff. 


CHAPTER   IV 

THE  CONTEST   FOR  CANADA 

WHILE  the  English  colonists  were  building  up  their  relatively 
compact  political  communities  on  the  narrow  Atlantic  seaboard, 
French  settlers  were  scattering  their  energies  over  a  vast  area 
stretching  from  the  Gulf  of  the  St.  Lawrence  to  the  mouth  of  the 
Mississippi.  Having  explored  the  Mississippi  and  Ohio  valleys, 
to  say  nothing  of  their  Western  expeditions  towards  the  Rocky 
Mountains,  the  French  naturally  claimed  all  the  lands  drained  by 
these  great  waterways.  The  forts  which  were  the  advance  guard 
of  their  dominion  were  steadily  pushed  south  and  east  toward 
the  confines  of  the  English  settlements.  The  English  also  claimed 
these  Western  lands,  and  before  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century 
trappers  and  explorers  began  to  pour  over  the  mountains  into  the 
West.  Frontier  warfare  was  carried  on  in  a  desultory  but  costly 
fashion  until  the  Seven  Years'  War  which  was  destined  to  destroy 
French  dominion.  The  most  striking  actors  in  this  last  scene 
of  a  long  drama  were  Wolfe  and  Montcalm  in  their  final  contest 
for  the  possession  of  Canada. 

§  i.   Relative  Strength  of  French  and  British1 

An  important  aim  of  Pitt's  enterprise  in  1759  was  the  conquest 
of  Canada.  The  other  French  dominions  and  dependencies  in 
North  America  had  already  fallen  like  outposts;  but  Canada, 
as  the  citadel,  remained  —  the  last  and  greatest  of  all.  That 
province  is  thought  to  derive  its  name  from  the  Indian  word  Kan- 
ata,  which  denotes  a  collection  of  huts,  but  which  the  first  discov- 
erers mistook  as  applying  to  the  country.  It  had  been  settled,  or, 
at  least,  explored,  by  the  French,  so  early  as  the  reign  of  FranciV 

'Lord  Mahon,  History  oj  England,  1713-1783,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  148  ff. 


The  Contest  for  Canada  453 

the  First;  but  it  was  not  until  the  next  century  that  the  cities 
of  Quebec  and  Montreal  arose,  —  the  former  in  connection  with 
the  Commercial  Company  of  the  West  Indies,  the  latter  with 
the  religious  seminary  of  St.  Sulpice.  Louis  XIV,  however,  early 
in  his  reign  decided  on  resuming  the  rights  of  the  crown  and  form- 
ing Canada  into  a  royal  government.  In  1759  the  population 
of  this  colony  was  sixty  thousand  souls ;  scarcely  more  —  so 
rapid  has  been  the  growth  of  its  prosperity  —  than  the  annual 
amount  of  its  immigration  eighty-three  years  afterwards.  In 
fact,  few  countries  were  ever  more  highly  gifted  with  whatever 
can  conduce  to  the  welfare  and  greatness  of  a  people:  a  fertile 
soil,  abundant  and  excellent  timber,  navigable  lakes  and  rivers, 
a  rigorous,  but  healthy  and  invigorating,  climate. 

In  comparing  together  the  French  and  the  English  colonists 
in  North  America  at  this  period  of  1759,  we  shall  find,  as  is  ac- 
knowledged by  the  French  historians,  the  English  far  superior 
in  numbers  and  wealth,  in  trade  and  industry.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  French  had  reaped  no  small  advantage  from  their  more 
lively  temper  and  conciliatory  manners;  they  had  attached  to 
themselves  much  the  greater  proportion  of  the  Red  Indian  tribes. 
It  is  true  that  the  English  as  well  as  the  French  could  claim  the 
assistance  of  some  of  these  savage  allies  who,  besides  fighting 
with  courage  or  suffering  with  firmness,  were  ever  ready  to  destroy 
defenceless  property,  to  fire  unguarded  outposts,  to  murder  and  to 
scalp  their  prisoners  —  atrocities  which  both  English  and  French 
accused  each  other  by  turns  of  secretly  directing,  and  which  it 
is  certt  in  at  least  that  neither  were  sufficiently  zealous  to  prevent. 
But  by  far  the  larger  numbers  of  this  Indian  race,  from  the  mouth 
of  the  St.  Lawrence  to  the  mouth  of  the  Mississippi,  had  become 
estranged  from  the  English  and  friendly  to  the  French.  No  man 
was  more  skilful  in  maintaining  this  attachment,  or  employing  it 
in  war,  than  the  Marquis  de  Montcalm,  the  French  general  in 
Canada,  and  the  second  in  authority  to  their  governor,  the  Marquis 
de  Vaudreuil.  Montcalm  was  born  at  Nismes  in  1712;  he  had 
attained  high  rank  in  the  service  of  his  country  at  home,  and  no 
less  high  praise  for  skill,  honor,  and  intrepidity.  To  cope  with 
such  an  adversary  on  his  own  ground,  within  sight  of  his  own 
walls  of  Quebec,  required  no  common  mind;  a  hero  was  needed, 
but  a  hero  was  found  when  the  execution  of  Pitt's  designs  on 
Canada  was  wisely  committed  to  Wolfe. 


454  English  Historians 


§  2.   Career  and  Character  of  Wolfe 

The  father  of  our  hero,  General  Edward  Wolfe,  a  veteran  from 
the  wars  of  Marlborough,  had  on  his  retirement  fixed  himself  at 
Westerham  in  Kent,  where  he  rented  the  vicarage  house  as  his 
residence.  In  that  house  his  eldest  son  James  was  born  in  1726. 
At  the  early  age  of  fourteen  the  boy  entered  the  army.  He  was 
present  at  the  battles  of  Dettingen  in  1742,  of  Fontenoy  in  1745, 
and  of  Lauffeld  in  1747.  Such  was  his  conduct  on  the  last  occa- 
sion as  to  attract  the  notice  and  receive  the  thanks  of  his  chief, 
the  Duke  of  Cumberland.  After  the  peace  —  being  already  at 
the  age  of  twenty-two  a  lieutenant-colonel  —  he  was  quartered 
in  Scotland,  and  then  in  the  south  of  England. 

Nature  had  done  but  little  for  him  either  in  comeliness  or  vigor; 
he  had  flaming  red  hair,  and,  contrary  to  the  fashion  of  the  times, 
wore  no  powder  to  conceal  it.  Even  from  his  early  youth  he  had 
suffered  very  severely  from  pains,  and  the  seeds  of  fatal  diseases 
were  deep-laid  in  his  constitution.  Nor  were  his  first  address 
and  manner  engaging,  although  in  private  life  he  was  esteemed 
by  all  who  knew  him  as  upright,  religious,  and  humane.  It  was 
observed  by  himself  in  writing  to  his  mother:  "  My  nature  requires 
some  extraordinary  events  to  produce  itself.  I  want  that  atten- 
tion and  those  assiduous  cares  that  commonly  go  along  with  good- 
nature and  humanity.  In  the  common  occurrences  of  life  I  own 
I  am  not  seen  to  advantage."  Happy  they  who  can  thus  calmly 
and  truly  judge  their  own  character!  Still  happier  they  to  whom 
"extraordinary  events"  do  afford  an  open  field  for  extraordinary 
powers !  How  common  and  how  cruel  either  of  these  alternatives 
in  human  life,  —  incapacities  which  embitter  and  disgrace  a  high 
station,  or  talents  which  pine  in  a  low  one ! 

The  correspondence  of  Wolfe  contains  frequent  and  favorable 
indications  of  his  character.  To  his  mother  he  writes  from  Glas- 
gow, "I  have  observed  your  instructions  so  religiously  that, 
rather  than  want  the  Word,  I  got  the  reputation  of  a  very  good 
Presbyterian,  by  frequenting  the  kirk  of  Scotland  till  our  chaplain 
appears."  It  may  be  remembered  that  Dr.  Johnson,  on  the  con- 
trary, thought  it  better  to  pass  several  months  without  joining 
in  public  worship  rather  than  attend  a  church  which  rejected 
Episcopal  ordination.  Thus,  again,  Wolfe  writes  from  Inverness: 
"There  are  times  when  men  fret  at  trifles,  and  quarrel  with  their 
toothpicks.  In  one  of  these  ill  habits  I  exclaim  against  my  present 


The  Contest  for  Canada  455 

condition,  and  think  it  the  worst  of  all,  but,  coolly  and  temperately, 
it  is  plainly  the  best.  Where  there  is  most  employment  and  least 
vice  there  one  should  wish  to  be."  Thus,  on  another  occasion,  to 
his  father:  "By  my  mother's  letter  I  find  that  your  bounty  and 
liberality  keep  pace,  as  they  usually  do,  with  my  necessities.  I 
shall  not  abuse  your  kindness,  nor  receive  it  unthankfully,  and 
what  use  I  make  of  it  shall  be  for  your  honor  and  the  king's  ser- 
vice; an  employment  worthy  the  hand  that  gives  it." 

The  amiable  temper  of  Wolfe  strongly  inclined  him  from  an 
early  age  to  domestic  life.  In  another  passage  of  his  corre- 
spondence he  declares  that  he  has  "a  turn  of  mind  that  favors 
matrimony  prodigiously;  I  love  children,  and  think  them  necessary 
to  people  in  their  later  days."  But  struggling  with  such  wishes, 
and  at  length  overpowering  them,  glowed  in  his  mind  an  ardent 
and  chivalrous  love  of  fame.  It  is  this  union  of  the  gentle  and  the 
bold  —  of  a.mbition  and  affection  —  that  gives,  as  it  appears  to 
me,  to  his  character  an  especial  charm.  His  profession  he  had 
closely  studied,  and  he  thoroughly  understood  it.  And  he  possessed, 
moreover,  what  no  mere  study  can  confer,  —  activity,  enterprise, 
and  readiness,  —  a  courage  that  never  quailed  before  danger, 
nor  yet  ever  shrunk  from  responsibility.  Over  that  aspiring  spirit 
ill  health  could  no  more  triumph  than  domestic  repose.  Thus, 
though  sickness  compelled  him  to  return  to  England  after  the 
conquest  of  Cape  Breton,  he  lost  no  time  in  offering  his  services 
to  Pitt  for  the  next  American  campaign.  Pitt  on  his  part  bravely 
set  at  defiance  the  claims  of  seniority  on  this  most  important 
occasion.  Had  he  consulted  those  claims  only,  — •  had  he,  like 
many  ministers  before  and  after  him,  thought  the  army  list  an 
unerring  guide,  —  he  might  probably  have  sent  out  to  Canada  a 
veteran,  experienced  and  brave,  quick  and  active,  and  might,  per- 
haps, have  received  in  return  a  most  eloquent  and  conclusive 
apology  for  being  beaten  or  for  standing  still ! 

A  slight  incident  connected  with  these  times  is  recorded  by  tra- 
dition, and  affords  a  striking  proof  how  much  a  fault  of  manner 
may  obscure  and  disparage  high  excellence  of  mind.  After 
Wolfe's  appointment,  and  on  the  day  preceding  his  embarkation 
for  America,  Pitt,  desirous  of  giving  his  last  verbal  instructions, 
invited  him  to  dinner,  Lord  Temple  being  the  only  other  guest. 
As  the  evening  advanced,  Wolfe  —  heated,  perhaps,  by  his  own 
aspiring  thoughts,  and  the  unwonted  society  of  statesmen  —  broke 
forth  into  a  strain  of  gasconade  and  bravado.  He  drew  his  sword, 
he  rapped  the  table  with  it,  he  flourished  it  round  the  room,  he 


456  English  Historians 

talked  of  the  mighty  things  which  that  sword  was  to  achieve.  The 
two  ministers  sat  aghast  at  an  exhibition  so  unusual  from  any 
man  of  real  sense  and  real  spirit.  And  when  at  last  Wolfe  had 
taken  his  leave,  and  his  carriage  was  heard  to  roll  from  the  door, 
Pitt  seemed  for  the  moment  shaken  in  the  high  opinion  which  his 
deliberate  judgment  had  formed  of  Wolfe;  he  lifted  up  his  eyes 
and  arms,  and  exclaimed  to  Lord  Temple,  "Good  God!  that 
I  should  have  intrusted  the  fate  of  the  country  and  of  the  admin- 
istration to  such  hands ! "  This  story  was  told  by  Lord  Temple 
himself  to  a  near  and  still  [1853]  surviving  relative,  —  one  of 
my  best  and  most  valued  friends.  It  confirms  Wolfe's  own 
avowal,  that  he  was  not  seen  to  advantage  in  the  common  occur- 
rences of  life,  and  shows  how  shyness  may  at  intervals  rush,  as  it 
were,  for  refuge,  into  the  opposite  extreme;  but  it  should  also 
lead  us  to  view  such  defects  of  manner  with  indulgence,  as  prov- 
ing that  they  may  co-exist  with  the  highest  ability  and  the  purest 
virtue. 

§  3.   Pitt's  Scheme  for  the  Conquest  of  Canada 

The  scheme  of  Pitt  for  th^  conquest  of  Canada  comprised  three 
separate  expeditions,  Quebec  being  the  point  of  junction  and  the 
final  object  for  each.  On  the  left,  a  body  of  provincials  under 
General  Prideaux,  and  of  friendly  Indians  under  Sir  William 
Johnson,  was  to  advance  against  Niagara,  reduce  that  fortress, 
embark  on  Lake  Ontario,  and  threaten  Montreal.  In  the  centre 
was  the  main  army,  consisting  of  twelve  thousand  men,  whose 
command  had  been  taken  from  General  Abercrombie  after  the 
last  campaign,  and  intrusted  to  General  Amherst.  The  instruc- 
tions of  Amherst  were,  to  renew  the  attack  on  Ticonderoga,  secure 
the  navigation  of  Lake  Champlain,  and  then  push  forward  along 
the  river  Richelieu,  to  combine  his  operations  with  Wolfe.  To 
Wolfe  himself  a  force  of  eight  thousand  men  was  committed; 
he  was  ordered  to  embark  in  the  fleet  of  Admiral  Saunders,  and 
to  sail  up  the  St.  Lawrence  as  soon  as  its  navigation  should  be 
clear  of  ice,  with  the  view  of  attempting  the  siege  of  Quebec.  This 
plan,  as  formed  by  a  civilian,  has  not  escaped  censure  from  some 
military  critics,  who  enlarge  especially  on  the  imprudence  of  pre- 
scribing or  expecting  cooperation  between  bodies  of  troops  so 
widely  distant,  composed  of  such  various  elements,  and  liable  to 
all  the  uncertainty  and  hazard  of  water-carriage.  It  was  hardly 
possible  that  Amherst  and  Wolfe  should  arrive  before  Quebec 


The  Contest  for  Canada  457 

at  the  same  period  of  time ;  and  failing  their  junction  it  was  highly 
probable  that  the  first  who  came  would  be  overpowered  by  Mont- 
calm  and  his  covering  army.  .  .  . 

§  4.    The  Arrival  of  Wolfe 

The  expeditions  of  Prideaux  and  Amherst  are  cast  into  the  shade 
by  Wolfe's.  He  had,  according  to  his  instructions,  embarked  on 
board  the  fleet  of  Admiral  Saunders,  which,  after  touching  at 
Louisburg  and  Halifax,  steered  for  the  mouth  of  the  St.  Lawrence. 
During  the  voyage  were  taken  two  small  store  vessels  of  the  enemy 
—  a  capture  which  seemed  of  slight  importance,  but  which  proved 
of  the  greatest,  for  on  board  these  ships  were  found  some  excellent 
charts  of  the  river,  which  enabled  the  admiral  to  sail  up  the  stream 
in  perfect  safety,  without  encountering  any  of  those  obstacles  and 
perils  that  (in  popular  apprehension,  at  least)  attended  its  navi- 
gation. It  was  not  until  the  2yth  of  June,  however,  that  the  army 
was  landed  on  the  Isle  of  Orleans,  in  front  of  Quebec.  On  the 
very  next  night  the  enemy  made  an  attempt  to  destroy  our  arma- 
ment by  sending  out  from  Quebec  seven  fire-ships.  These  came 
burning  down  the  river,  assisted  by  a  strong  current,  and  aimed 
directly  upon  our  fleet;  but  our  admiral,  in  expectation  of  some 
such  design,  had  made  preparations  to  defeat  it.  All  his  boats 
were  out,  well  manned  and  well  armed,  with  an  officer  in  each. 
The  fire-ships,  on  approaching,  were  instantly  boarded ;  grapplings 
and  chains  were  affixed  to  them,  after  which  they  were  towed, 
clear  of  every  ship,  to  shore  on  the  Isle  of  Orleans,  where  they 
burnt  to  ashes  without  having  done  the  least  damage. 

The  Isle  of  Orleans,  on  which  the  army  had  landed,  is  about 
twenty  miles  long  and  seven  broad,  highly  cultivated,  and  afford- 
ing to  the  soldiers  every  kind  of  refreshment  after  their  long  and 
weary  navigation.  Wolfe,  however,  left  them  little  leisure  for 
repose.  On  the  agth  he  despatched  Brigadier  Monckton,  with 
four  battalions,  across  to  the  right  bank  of  the  river,  that  they 
might  take  possession  of  Point  Levis,  a  headland  which  looks 
towards  Quebec,  and  where  the  enemy  had  constructed  a  battery. 
This  object  was  soon  attained,  after  only  two  or  three  slight  skir- 
mishes between  the  advanced  parties  and  the  enemy's  regular 
force.  Wolfe  himself  marched  with  his  main  body  along  the  island 
to  its  westernmost  point,  —  from  whence  rose,  full  to  view,  the 
harbor  and  city  of  Quebec,  —  a  sight  at  once  tempting  and  dis- 
couraging. "For  no  place,"  says  Burke,  "seems  possessed  of 


458  English  Historians 

greater  benefits  of  Nature,  nor  is  there  any  of  which  Nature  seems 
more  to  have  consulted  the  defence."  In  Wolfe's  own  words, 
"there  is  the  strongest  country,  perhaps,  in  the  world,  to  rest  the 
defence  of  the  town  and  the  colony  upon." 

§  5.    The  Situation  of  Quebec  for  Defence 

The  city  of  Quebec  is  built  upon  and  beneath  a  ridge  of  rocks 
that  terminates  as  a  promontory  at  the  spot  where  the  river  St. 
Charles  flows  from  the  left  bank  into  the  St.  Lawrence.  This 
is  also  the  point  where  the  St.  Lawrence  first  in  its  upward  navi- 
gation appears  to  narrow;  for  while  in  the  previous  course  of  above 
one  hundred  leagues  from  its  mouth  it  is  nowhere  less  than  from 
four  to  five  leagues  broad,  —  while  it  is  divided  by  the  Isle  of 
Orleans  into  two  both  considerable  streams,  —  it  suddenly  con- 
tracts above  that  Isle,  and  above  the  inlet  of  the  St.  Charles,  so 
that  opposite  Quebec  it  is  scarcely  one  mile  over.  Hence  the  name 
of  Quebec  has  been  derived  from  a  word  of  similar  sound,  and 
denoting  a  strait,  in  one  of  the  Indian  tongues;  while  other  writers 
deem  it  of  French  extraction,  and  perhaps  only  a  corruption  of 
the  Norman  Caudebec.  At  this  period  the  town  (divided  into  the 
Upper  and  Lower)  might  contain  seven  thousand  souls;  it  held  a 
cathedral,  a  bishop's  palace,  and  other  stately  buildings,  and  was 
crowned  by  the  castle  of  St.  Louis.  In  front  of  the  harbor  there 
spreads  a  considerable  sandbank,  so  as  to  prevent  the  close  approach 
or  attack  of  any  hostile  fleet.  Beyond  the  city,  the  rugged  ridges 
on  which  it  is  built  continue  steep  and  precipitous  for  many  miles 
along  the  river,  and  are  there  called  the  Heights  of  Abraham. 
In  the  opposite  direction,  again,  from  the  mouth  of  the  St.  Charles 
down  the  left  bank  of  the  St.  Lawrence,  the  ground  is  scarcely 
less  difficult  and  rugged  during  several  miles,  until  nearly  opposite 
the  point  of  the  Isle  of  Orleans,  where  the  stream  of  Montmorency, 
after  flowing  through  the  upper  country,  descends  into  the  St. 
Lawrence  by  a  fall  of  three  hundred  feet. 

To  defend  this  strong  country  the  Marquis  de  Montcalm  had 
lately  solicited  and  received  fresh  reinforcements  from  home. 
More  than  twenty  ships,  laden  with  supplies  and  recruits,  had 
sailed  before  the  blockade  of  the  French  ports  and  entered  the 
St.  Lawrence  before  the  arrival  of  the  English  armament.  Mont- 
calm  had,  however,  few  regular  soldiers,  but  many  Canadians 
and  Indians,  in  all  about  ten  thousand  —  "a  numerous  body 
of  armed  men,"  says  Wolfe,  "for  I  cannot  call  it  an  army.  —  If 


The  Contest  for  Canada  459 

the  Marquis," he  adds,  "had  shut  himself  up  in  the  town  of  Quebec, 
it  would  have  been  long  since  in  our  possession,  because  the  de- 
fences are  inconsiderable,  and  our  artillery  very  formidable." 
But  the  skilful  and  wary  Frenchman  had  resolved  to  trust  to  the 
strength  of  the  country  rather  than  that  of  the  ramparts.  He  drew 
up  his  army  on  what  was  supposed  the  only  accessible  side  of 
Quebec,  on  the  line  called  Beauport,  between  the  St.  Charles  and 
the  Montmorency,  communicating  with  Quebec  by  a  bridge  of 
boats  over  the  St.  Charles,  and  this  ground,  steep  as  it  was  by 
nature,  he  further  intrenched  at  every  open  spot.  On  his  front 
were  the  river  and  its  sandbanks;  on  his  rear,  impenetrable  woods. 
Thus  posted  he  was  able,  without  running  any  risk  or  hazard, 
to  prevent  either  an  investment  of  the  city  or  a  battle  upon  equal 
terms. 

§  6.    The  Opening  0}  Wolfe's  Campaign 

The  first  measure  of  Wolfe,  such  being  the  state  of  things, 
was  to  raise  batteries  at  the  points  both  of  Levis  and  of  the  Isle 
of  Orleans.  From  hence  his  artillery  began  to  play  upon  Quebec, 
to  the  damage  of  the  Upper  Town,  to  the  destruction  of 
the  Lower,  but  without  any  tendency  or  progress  towards  the 
reduction  of  the  place.  Montcalm  remained  entirely  on  the  de- 
fensive, except  on  one  occasion,  when  he  sent  sixteen  hundred 
men  across  the  St.  Lawrence  to  attack  the  English  batteries  on 
Point  Levis.  "Bad  intelligence,  no  doubt,  of  our  strength," 
writes  Wolfe,  "induced  him  to  this  measure;  however,  the  de- 
tachment judged  better  than  their  general,  and  retired."  Some 
works  for  the  security  of  the  British  hospitals  and  stores  were 
meanwhile  constructing  on  the  Isle  of  Orleans ;  after  which,  in  the 
night  of  July  the  gth,  Wolfe  caused  his  troops  to  be  transported 
to  the  left  bank,  and  encamped  opposite  the  enemy,  the  river 
Montmorency  flowing  between  them.  During  this  time  the  enemy 
made  repeated  attempts  against  our  ships  by  fire-rafts  and  other 
combustibles,  but  their  designs  were  constantly  baffled  by  the  skill 
and  vigilance  of  Saunders.  A  squadron  was  also  despatched 
under  Admiral  Holmes,  to  pass  by  Quebec  and  fix  its  station  far- 
ther up  the  St.  Lawrence,  so  that  the  river  might  be  blockaded 
both  above  and  below  the  town. 

The  great  object  of  the  English  general  was  now  to  entice  or 
decoy  the  enemy  from  their  strong  camp  to  an  engagement.  Not 
only  did  he  endeavor  to  alarm  them  for  Quebec  on  the  opposite 
side,  by  means  of  Holmes's  squadron,  but  he  repeatedly  sent 


460  English  Historians 

detachments  along  the  Montmorency  to  make  a  feint  of  passing 
that  river  farther  from  the  falls.  But  no  stratagem  sufficed  to 
draw  the  French  commander  from  his  advantageous  post.  Wolfe 
had  also  the  mortification  of  seeing  no  effect  from  a  manifesto 
which  he  had  issued  at  his  first  landing,  to  assure  the  Canadians 
of  protection  in  their  persons,  property,  and  religion,  provided 
they  remained  quiet  and  took  no  part  in  the  war.  "Now,  on  the 
contrary,"  as  he  states  himself,  "we  have  continual  skirmishes; 
old  people,  seventy  years  of  age,  and  boys  of  fifteen,  fire  at  our  de- 
tachments, and  kill  or  wound  our  men,  from  the  edges  of  the 
woods."  Incensed  at  such  conduct,  the  general  adopted,  or  at 
least  connived  at,  a  cruel  retaliation.  All  the  detached  houses, 
the  barns,  the  stables,  —  nay,  even  the  standing  corn,  —  were 
devoted  to  utter  destruction,  and  thus  both  banks  of  the  river 
began  immediately  to  display  a  most  dismal  aspect  of  fire  and 
smoke.  Still,  however,  Montcalm,  wisely  intent  on  final  triumph, 
remained  immovable. 

Nothing,  therefore,  remained  for  Wolfe  but  to  attack  the  French 
in  their  intrenchments.  The  day  he  fixed  for  this  hazardous 
attempt  was  the  3ist  of  July;  the  place  he  selected  was  the  mouth 
of  the  Montmorency,  as  the  only  quarter  where  his  artillery  could 
be  brought  into  play,  and  from  whence  his  retreat,  in  case  of 
a  repulse,  could  be  secure.  Accordingly  the  boats  of  the  fleet 
were  filled  with  grenadiers,  and  rowed  towards  the  shore  at 
the  proper  time  of  tide.  As  they  drew  near  many  of  the 
boats  grounded  upon  a  ledge  of  rocks:  an  accident  that  caused 
some  disorder  and  great  delay.  On  reaching  land  the  grena- 
diers had  been  directed  to  form  themselves  upon  the  beach,  and 
to  halt  until  other  troops  on  their  right  had  passed  the  Mont- 
morency ford,  and  were  ready  to  assist  them.  But  whether  from 
the  noise  and  hurry  of  their  landing,  or  from  their  own  ill- 
regulated  ardor,  they  rushed  at  once  and  impetuously  towards 
the  enemy's  intrenchments.  The  enemy,  from  the  summit  of  the 
heights,  received  them  with  a  galling  fire,  which  threw  them  pres- 
ently into  confusion,  and  obliged  them  to  seek  shelter  behind  a 
deserted  redoubt.  In  this  situation  —  unable  to  rally  under  so 
severe  a  fire,  while  the  night  drew  on,  while  a  tempest  was 
gathering,  while  the  tide  began  to  make  —  the  general  saw  no 
other  resource  than  to  order  a  retreat.  This  retreat  he  conducted 
with  skill,  everywhere  exposing  his  person  with  characteristic 
intrepidity.  "The  French,"  he  says,  "did  not  attempt  to  interrupt 
our  march.  Some  of  their  savages  came  down  to  murder  such 


The  Contest  for  Canada  461 

wounded  as  could  not  be  brought  away,  and  to  scalp  the  dead, 
as  their  custom  is." 

In  this  check  the  troops  had  sustained  no  inconsiderable  loss, 
and,  what  was  worse,  had  become  downcast  and  dispirited.  There 
seemed  no  longer  any  hope  of  forcing  the  French  lines.  The  pros- 
pect of  cooperation  from  Amherst  or  from  Johnson,  on  which 
they  had  confidently  reckoned,  grew  daily  fainter  and  fainter. 
They  learned,  indeed,  from  some  prisoners,  that  Niagara  had  been 
taken ;  that  Ticonderoga  and  Crown  Point  had  been  abandoned ; 
—  but  week  after  week  passed  on,  the  season  wasted  apace,  and 
no  auxiliaries  appeared.  Wolfe  himself,  fatigue  and  anxiety 
preying  on  his  delicate  frame,  fell  violently  ill  of  a  fever.  No 
sooner  was  his  health  in  some  degree  restored,  than  he  proceeded 
with  the  admiral  and  the  chief  engineer  to  inspect,  as  closely  as 
they  could,  the  works  of  Quebec,  with  a  view  to  a  general  assault; 
but  there  seemed  to  them  no  hope  of  tsuccess  from  such  an  enter- 
prise. Wolfe  had  also  summoned  to  council  his  second  and  third 
in  command,  —  Brigadiers  Monckton  and  George  Townshend, 
the  brother  of  Charles.  It  was  their  unanimous  opinion,  that  no 
other  chance  remained  than  to  carry  the  troops  above  the  town, 
and  thus  again  endeavor  to  draw  Montcalm  from  his  inaccessible 
post.  In  pursuance  of  this  determination  the  camp  at  Mont- 
morency  was  broken  up,  and  the  army  moved  across  the  river  to 
Point  Levis.  From  thence  —  again  going  on  board  their  trans- 
ports —  they  passed  Quebec,  and  proceeded  several  miles  up  the 
St.  Lawrence,  when  they  once  more  disembarked  on  its  right  bank. 
So  much  had  their  ranks  been  thinned  by  death  or  by  disease, 
that,  ,'.fter  providing  for  the  necessary  defence  of  the  Isle  of  Orleans, 
and  of  Point  Levis,  there  remained  scarcely  more  than  thirty- 
six  hundred  effective  men  for  action.  To  conceal  in  some  degree 
their  scanty  numbers,  and  to  spread  doubts  and  alarms  among 
the  enemy,  Admiral  Holmes's  squadron  was  directed  to  make 
movements  up  the  river  for  several  successive  days,  as  if  threatening 
more  than  one  point  above  the  town.  The  Marquis  de  Mont- 
calm  was  not,  however,  induced  to  quit  his  lines;  he  merely  de- 
spatched M.  de  Bougainville,  with  about  fifteen  hundred  men,  to 
watch  the  motions  of  the  English  army,  and  to  keep  alongside 
with  it  on  the  opposite  shore. 

It  was  under  such  circumstances,  and  on  the  gih  of  September, 
that  Wolfe  addressed  his  last  letter  to  the  Secretary  of  State.  His 
own  view  of  his  prospects  was  most  gloomy ;  he  writes  as  if  anxious 
to  prepare  the  public  mind  in  England  for  his  failure  or  retreat, 


462  English   Historians 

and  as  if  his  main  motive  in  still  remaining  were  to  keep  the  French 
army  in  play,  and  divert  it  from  other  quarters.  Here  are  his 
own  concluding  words,  "I  am  so  far  recovered  as  to  do  business, 
but  my  constitution  is  entirely  ruined,  without  the  consolation  of 
having  done  any  considerable  service  to  the  state,  or  without 
any  prospect  of  it."  Let  him  who  reads  these  words  and  their 
event  learn  from  them  never  to  lose  hope  of  success  in  an  honorable 
cause.  The  aid  of  Providence,  as  it  should  never  be  presumed  on, 
so  it  should  never  be  despaired  of.  Within  five  days  from  the 
date  of  that  letter  the  name  of  Wolfe  had  become  immortal  to  all 
ages! 

§  7.   Climbing  the  Heights  0}  Abraham 

It  does  not  seem  certain  at  what  period  or  by  what  accident 
the  English  general  first  conceived  the  daring  thought  to  land  his 
troops  beneath  the  Heights  of  Abraham,  on  some  point  less  guarded 
than  the  rest.  But  the  honor  of  that  first  thought  belongs  to  Wolfe 
alone ;  and,  once  conceived,  it  was  no  less  ably  and  boldly  pursued. 
The  ships  under  Admiral  Saunders  were  directed  to  make  a  feint 
opposite  the  French  camp  at  Beaufort,  as  if  another  attack  upon 
it  were  designed.  A  similar  demonstration  on  the  opposite  side 
—  three  leagues  higher  up  the  St.  Lawrence  —  was  enjoined  to 
Admiral  Holmes.  At  or  near  his  own  station,  Wolfe  collected  as 
many  boats  as  he  could  without  raising  suspicion  and  alarm.  All 
preparations  being  completed,  he  suddenly  gave  orders  for  the 
troops  to  embark  about  one  o'clock  in  the  morning  of  the  i3th  of 
September,  favored  by  a  dark  night  and  by  a  flowing  tide.  There 
was  only  room  on  board  for  about  half  his  army,  and  the  remain- 
der was  left  for  a  second  embarkation.  The  point  to  which  he 
steered  was  a  small  bay  or  inlet,  less  than  two  miles  above  Quebec. 
It  has  ever  since  borne  the  name  of  "Wolfe's  Cove."  Swiftly, 
but  silently,  did  the  boats  fall  down  with  the  tide,  unobserved 
by  the  enemy's  sentinels,  who  were,  or  who  should  have  been,  at 
their  posts  along  the  shore.  Of  the  soldiers  on  board,  how  eagerly 
must  every  heart  have  throbbed  at  the  coming  conflict;  how  in- 
tently must  every  eye  have  contemplated  the  dark  outline  as  it 
lay  pencilled  upon  the  midnight  sky,  and  as  every  moment  it  grew 
closer  and  clearer,  of  the  hostile  heights !  Not  a  word  was  spoken, 
not  a  sound  was  heard  beyond  the  rippling  of  the  stream.  Wolfe 
alone,  thus  tradition  has  told  us,  repeated  in  a  low  voice  to 
the  other  officers  in  his  boat  those  beautiful  stanzas  with  which 
a  country  churchyard  inspired  the  muse  of  Gray.  One  noble 


The  Contest  for  Canada  463 

line  —  "The  paths  of  glory  lead  but  to  the  grave  "  —  must  have 
seemed  at  such  a  moment  fraught  with  mournful  meaning.  At 
the  close  of  the"  recitation  Wolfe  added,  "Now,  gentlemen,  I 
would  rather  be  the  author  of  that  poem  than  take  Quebec." 

On  reaching  the  northern  bank  at  the  spot  designed,  —  and 
Wolfe  was  amongst  the  first  to  leap  on  shore,  —  the  troops  found 
themselves  at  the  foot  of  a  high  and  precipitous  cliff,  leading  to  an 
extensive  tableland,  —  the  Heights  of  Abraham.  Close 'upon  the 
brow  of  the  hill  was  the  post  of  a  French  captain,  with  one  hundred 
and  fifty  men.  There  was  but  a  single  path  upwards,  scarcely 
to  be  discovered  in  the  darkness,  and  so  narrow  that  in  some  places 
no  two  could  go  abreast.  But  the  ardor  of  Wolfe  and  of  his  men 
was  not  to  be  repressed.  The  vanguard,  led  by  Colonel  Howe, 
a  brother  of  the  nobleman  who  fell  at  Ticonderoga,  began  to  scale 
the  precipice,  each  man  scrambling  and  climbing  as  he  best  could, 
but  mostly  pulling  themselves  up  by  the  bushes  and  brambles, 
by  the  stumps  of  trees,  or  by  the  projecting  points  of  rock.  The 
enemy's  picket,  roused  at  length,  but  too  late,  heard  the  rustling 
from  below,  and  fired  down  the  precipice  at  random,  as  our  men 
did  up  into  the  air.  But  immediately  after  this  chance-volley, 
the  French,  struck  with  panic  at  the  strangeness  of  the  attempt, 
and  the  sudden  appearance  of  foes,  whom  they  supposed  on  the 
other  side  of  the  river,  fled  from  their  post,  notwithstanding  all 
the  exertions  of  their  officer.  Our  vanguard  reached  the  summit 
in  safety,  and  at  once  formed  itself  in  line.  Fresh  detachments 
from  below  were  now  continually  ascending,  and  a  single  piece 
of  artillery  was  also  by  main  force  dragged  up.  Meanwhile  the 
boats  had  gone  back  for  the  second  embarkation  under  Brigadier 
Townshend,  and  thus  at  daybreak  the  whole  British  army  stood 
in  order  of  battle  upon  the  heights. 

§  8.   The  Battle  on  the  Heights 

When  the  Marquis  de  Montcalm  was  first  informed  that  the 
English  army  appeared  on  the  Heights  of  Abraham,  he  thought 
the  rumor  only  another  feint  to  draw  him  from  his  lines ;  but,  on 
riding  forward,  his  own  eyes  convinced  him  of  his  error.  Still, 
however,  he  was  confident  of  a  victory  over  his  assailants.  ''I 
see  them,"  he  said,  "where  they  ought  not  to  be;  but  if  we  must 
fight,  I  shall  crush  them."  Without  further  delay,  he  hurried  over 
the  St.  Charles  by  the  bridge  of  boats,  with  as  many  of  his  troops 
as  he  could  muster  for  action  on  so  sudden  an  emergency.  He 


464  English   Historians 

found  the  English  already  advancing,  and  formed  on  the  high 
ground  at  the  back  of  Quebec.     They  had  no  cavalry,  and  only 
one  gun,  but  were  full  of  hope  and  ardor.     Their  left  wing  had 
been  drawn  out  by  Wolfe  in  the  manner  which  military  men  call 
en  potence;  that  is,  a  body  with  two  faces  to  the  enemy,  so  as  to 
guard  against  its  being  outflanked.     Amongst  the  troops  in  this 
quarter  was  a  Highland  regiment,  one  of  Pitt's  recent  creation, 
and  already  conspicuous  for  its  bravery  and  conduct;   several  of 
its  men  had  been  in  Howe's  vanguard,  and  thus  the  first  to  scale 
the  precipice.     On  the  right  were  the  Louisburg  grenadiers,  ex- 
tending towards  the  St.  Lawrence,  and  with  a  regiment  behind 
them  as  a  reserve.     It  was  in  the  front  of  this  right  wing,  where 
the  hottest  fire  was  expected,  that  Wolfe  had  fixed  his  own  station. 
The  dispositions  of  Montcalm  on  his  part  were  equally  judicious. 
He  had  skilfully  intermingled  his  regular  and  Canadian  regiments, 
so  as  to  strengthen  and  support  the  latter,  while  the  greater  part 
of  his  Indians  were  to  spread  themselves  beyond  the  English  left, 
and  endeavor  to  outflank  it.     The  thickets  and  copses  in  his 
front  he  filled  with  fifteen  hundred  of  his  best  marksmen,  who 
kept  up  an  irregular  but  galling  fire.     By  these  skirmishers  the 
advanced  pickets  of  the  English  were  driven  in  with  something 
of  confusion ;  but  Wolfe  hastened  to  ride  along  the  line,  encouraging 
the  men  to  stand  firm,  telling  them  that  the  light  infantry  had  only 
obeyed  his  instructions,  and,  above  all,  enjoining  them  to  reserve 
their  fire  until  the  enemy  should  come  within  forty  yards  of  the 
muzzles  of  their  guns.     Thus  our  troops  remained  immovabl 
while  the  French  were  coming  on,  and  firing  as  they  came.     Man* 
of  our  men  were  struck ;  Wolfe  himself  received  a  ball  in  his  wris1 
but  he  tied  his  handkerchief  above  the  wound,  and  never  swerve 
from  his  post.     Immovable  the  troops  remained  until  they  sa 
the  enemy  within  forty  yards,  then,  indeed,  a  well-aimed  ar  ' 
simultaneous  volley  was  poured  from  the  whole  British  line, 
sooner  had  the  smoke  cleared  away  than  the  great  effect  of  t. 
close  discharge  became  apparent;    numbers  of  the  enemy  w 
lying  on  the  ground ;  some  few  had  fled ;  the  greater  part  wavert 
At  this  decisive  moment  Wolfe  darted  forward  and  cheered  o 
his  grenadiers  to  a  charge.     Just  then  a  second  ball  struck  hi 
in  the  groin,  but  he  dissembled  his  anguish,  and  continued  to  g: 
his  orders  as  before.     A  third  shot,  however,  piercing  his  brea.-. 
he  fell  to  the  ground,  and  was  carried  to  the  rear.     At  near!; 
the  same  time,  in  another  part  of  the  field,  Brigadier  Monckto. 
was  severely  wounded,  and  thus  the  command  devolved  on  Briga 


The  Contest  for  Canada  465 

dier  Townshend,  who  took  all  proper  measures  to  complete  the 
victory  and  to  pursue  the  vanquished. 

At  the  rear,  to  which  he  had  been  conveyed,  Wolfe,  meanwhile, 
lay  expiring.  From  time  to  time  he  lifted  his  head  to  gaze  on 
the  field  of  battle,  till  he  found  his  eyesight  begin  to  fail.  Then 
for  some  moments  he  lay  motionless  with  no  other  sign  of  life 
than  heavy  breathing  or  a  stifled  groan.  All  at  once  an  officer 
who  stood  by  exclaimed,  "See  how  they  run  !"  —  "  Who  run  ?" 
cried  Wolfe,  eagerly  raising  himself  on  his  elbow.  "The  enemy," 
answered  the  officer;  "they  give  way  in  all  directions."  -—  "Then 
God  be  praised!"  said  Wolfe,  after  a  short  pause;  "I  shall  die 
happy."  These  were  his  last  words ;  he  again  fell  back,  and  turn- 
ing on  his  side,  as  if  by  a  sharp  convulsion,  expired.  He  was  but 
thirty-three  years  of  age,  when  thus  —  the  Nelson  of  the  army  - 
he  died  amidst  the  tidings  of  the  victory  he  had  achieved. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Parkman,  Montcalm  and  Wolfe.  Edgar,  The  Struggle  for  a  Continent. 
Kingsford,  The  History  of  Canada,  Vol.  IV.  Seeley,  The  Expansion  of 
England.  Bradley,  The  Fight  with  France  for  North  America. 


id* 


ao 
rni 

.71 

,  IP.  '. 

l. 


2W 


PART  VII 

ENGLAND  UNDER  THE   GEORGES 
CHAPTER  I 

WALPOLE  AND   HIS   SYSTEM 

ON  the  death  of  Queen  Anne,  in  1714,  the  Tory  party  were 
completely  discomfited  by  the  Whigs.  The  former  were  ex- 
cluded from  office  and  branded  as  Jacobites.  The  new  king  was 
made  to  feel  that  he  owed  his  throne  to  the  Whigs  who  crowded 
around  him  and  identified  their  political  enemies  with  traitors. 
The  character  of  the  king  and  his  foreign  interests  led  him  to  rely 
more  and  more  on  the  victorious  party  and  leave  the  management 
of  domestic  politics  in  their  hands.  It  was  under  these  circum- 
stances that  Walpole  became  First  Lord  of  the  Treasury  and 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  in  1721  and  at  the  same  time  virtual 
master  of  the  country  through  his  support  in  Parliament,  his  in- 
fluence with  the  king,  his  use  of  the  appointments  to  government 
positions,  and  his  corrupt  practices.  During  his  regime  of  nearly 
twenty  years  the  foundations  of  party  government  and  the  cabinet 
system  were  so  securely  laid  that  later  attempts  to  overthrow  them 
failed.  Though  the  life  and  work  of  Sir  Robert  Walpole  have  not 
been  exhaustively  treated  by  any  modern  writer,  the  student  will 
find  the  brief  biography  by  Mr.  Morley,  the  statesman  and  brilliant 
man  of  letters,  a  suggestive  and  illuminating  study,  which  gives  a 
somewhat  more  favorable  view  of  the  practices  of  the  former  than 
is  to  be  found  in  most  other  accounts. 

466 


Walpole  and   his  System  467 

§  i.    Walpole  and  Eighteenth-century  Statesmen1 

Is  it  true  to  say  that  Walpole  was  unscrupulous  in  his  means 
for  grasping  power  and.  keeping  it  ?  That  he  gave  some  advice 
without  a  blush  which  any  leading  English  statesman  to-day 
would  readily  rather  extinguish  his  public  life  than  give,  is  unfortu- 
nately too  certain.  Writers  on  morals  tell  us  that  conduct  has 
an  aesthetic  and  an  ethical  aspect ;  it  is  beautiful  or  ugly,  'as  well  as 
right  or  wrong.  It  is  certain  that,  as  some  say,  he  had  not  the 
delicate  sense  of  honor,  which  marks  the  ideal  public  man.  But  it 
cannot  be  disguised  that  many  men  have  shown  a  want  of  a  fine 
sense  of  honor,  whom  still  we  should  hesitate  to  brand  generally 
as  either  unscrupulous  or  unprincipled.  Chatham  acted  in  a  way 
that  was  not  at  all  to  his  honor,  when  he  first  offered  to  screen 
Walpole,  and  then  on  his  offer  being  repulsed,  redoubled  the  vio- 
lence of  his  attack.  George  III  did  many  shabby,  cunning,  and 
unscrupulous  things,  yet  tradition  is  gradually  coming  to  pass  him 
off  as  a  very  honest  gentleman.  Did  Mr.  Pitt  exhibit  perfect 
delicacy  of  honor  when,  on  coming  back  to  power  in  1804,  he 
allowed  the  stubborn  king  to  ostracize  Mr.  Fox?  Yet  Pitt  is 
usually  treated  as  the  pink  of  moral  elevation,  and  he  did  undoubt- 
edly take  a  loftier  view  of  the  connection  between  public  authority 
and  private  honor  than  had  been  the  fashion  before  his  time.  The 
equity  of  history  requires  that  we  shall  judge  men  of  action  by  the 
standards  of  men  of  action.  Nobody  would  single  out  highminded- 
ness  as  one  of  Walpole's  conspicuous  attributes.  It  is  not  a  very 
comrron  attribute  among  active  politicians  in  any  age.  On  the 
other  hand,  Walpole  was  neither  low-minded  nor  small-minded. 
His  son  had  a  right  to  boast  that  he  never  gave  up  the  interests  of 
his  party  to  serve  his  own,  though  he  often  gave  up  his  own  opin- 
ions to  please  friends  who  were  serving  themselves.  With  the 
firmest  confidence  in  himself,  he  was  neither  pragmatical  nor 
arrogant.  He  was  wholly  free  from  spite  and  from  envy ;  he  bore 
no  malice,  though  when  he  had  once  found  a  man  out  in  playing 
tricks,  he  took  care  never  to  forget  it;  and  he  was  right,  for  the 
issues  at  stake  were  too  important  to  allow  him  to  forget. 

§  2.    The  Exclusion  of  Able  Colleagues 

It  is  said  that  he  could  not  brook  a  colleague  of  superior  ability, 
and  that  he  took  care  to  surround  himself  with  mediocrities  like 

1  Morley,  Walpole,  pp.  116  ff.  By  permission  of  Rt.  Hon.  John  Morley 
and  The  Macmillan  Company,  Publishers. 


468  English  Historians 

the  Duke  of  Newcastle.  We  may  test  the  accusation  by  the  con- 
duct of  Chatham.  Nobody  has  ever  taunted  him  with  this  ignoble 
jealousy,  yet  he  acted  precisely  as  Walpole  acted.  After  fighting 
against  Newcastle  as  long  as  he  could,  he  gave  way  to  him  just  as 
Walpole  had  found  it  expedient  to  do.  "I  borrowed  the  Duke 
of  Newcastle's  majority,"  said  Pitt  in  1757,  "to  carry  on  the  public 
business."  It  was  his  majority,  not  his  mediocrity,  that  Walpole 
valued.  So  with  the  proscriptions.  Pitt  peremptorily  excluded 
Henry  Fox  from  his  famous  administration,  though  Fox  was 
the  ablest  debater  in  Parliament;  and  he  declined  to  advance 
Charles  Townshend,  who  was  more  near  to  being  his  intellectual 
equal  than  anybody  else  then  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Neither 
in  Pitt's  case  nor  in  Walpole's  case  is  it  necessary  to  ascribe 
their  action  to  anything  worse  than  the  highly  judicious  convic- 
tion that  whether  in  carrying  out  a  great  policy  of  peace  like 
Walpole's,  or  an  arduous  policy  of  war  like  Pitt's,  the  very  worst 
impediment  that  a  minister  can  have  is  a  colleague  in  his  cabinet 
who  spoils  superior  ability  by  perversities  of  restlessness  and 
egotism.  There  is  not  one  of  the  able  men  ostracized,  as  it  is 
called,  by  Walpole  whose  political  steadiness  and  personal  fidelity 
he  could  safely  trust;  and  not  one  of  them,  let  us  not  forget  to 
add,  who,  for  fifteen  years  after  his  fall,  ever  showed  himself  any 
better  able  to  work  with  other  colleagues  and  leaders  than  he  had 
been  to  work  with  Walpole. 

§  3.   Walpole  not  an  Intriguer 

Walpole  took  the  pleasures,  the  honors,  the  prizes  of  the  world 
as  they  came  in  his  way,  and  he  thoroughly  relished  and  enjoyed 
them;  but  what  his  heart  was  seriously  set  upon  all  the  time  — 
seriously,  persistently,  strenuously,  devotedly  —  was  the  promo- 
tion of  good  government  and  the  frustration  and  confusion  of  its 
enemies.  When  men  got  in  his  way,  he  thrust  them  aside,  with- 
out misgiving  or  remorse,  just  as  a  commander  in  the  field  would 
remove  a  meddling,  wrong-headed,  or  incompetent  general  of 
division  without  remorse.  But  to  be  remorseless  is  a  very  different 
thing  from  being  unscrupulous.  I  am  not  aware  of  a  single  proof 
that  Walpole  ever  began  those  intrigues  against  his  enemies  which 
they  were  always  so  ready  to  practise  against  him.  It  was  Stan- 
hope and  Sunderland,  not  Walpole,  who  began  and  carried  out 
the  intrigues  that  ended  in  the  schism  of  1717.  It  was  Carteret 
who  caballed  with  the  Tory  leaders  against  his  own  colleagues 


Walpole  and  his  System  469 

after  Sunderland's  death.  It  was  Bolingbroke  and  the  Duchess 
of  Kendal  who  strove  by  underhand  arts  to  procure  access  for  the 
former  to  George  I,  and  when  Walpole  found  out  what  was  going 
on,  he  at  once  boldly  urged  the  king  to  grant  Bolingbroke  his 
audience,  and  to  hear  all  that  he  had  to  say.  It  was  Chesterfield 
who  tried  to  set  up  a  clique  against  Walpole  within  his  own  min- 
istry. Much  is  made  of  the  case  of  Townshend.  But  it  is  rather 
a  paradox  to  prove  Walpole 's  imperious  refusal  to  share  power  with 
able  colleagues  by  referring  us  to  Townshend,  with  whom  he 
worked  in  unbroken  cordiality  for  the  best  part  of  thirty  years 
and  with  whom  he  did  loyally  share  power,  himself  in  a  relation 
rather  subordinate  than  otherwise,  for  three  of  these  years.  It  was 
Townshend,  moreover,  who  at  the  last  took  advantage  of  his 
journey  with  the  king  to  Hanover  secretly  to  ingratiate  himself 
in  the  royal  favor  to  the  disadvantage  of  Walpole  at  home.  Plenty 
of  intriguing  was  carried  on,  but  not  by  Walpole.  A  candid  and 
particular  examination  of  the  political  history  of  that  time,  so  far 
as  the  circumstances  are  known  to  us,  leads  to  the  conclusion  that 
of  all  his  contemporaries,  from  men  of  genius  like  Bolingbroke 
and  Carteret,  from  able  and  brilliant  men  like  Townshend  and 
Chesterfield,  Wyndham,  and  Pulteney,  down  to  a  mediocre  per- 
sonage like  the  Duke  of  Newcastle,  Walpole  was  the  least  unscrup- 
ulous of  the  men  of  that  time,  the  most  straightforward,  bold,  and 
open,  and  the  least  addicted  to  scheming  and  cabal.  He  relied 
more  than  they  did,  not  less,  upon  what  after  all  in  every  age  is 
the  only  solid  foundation  of  political  power,  though  it  may  not 
always  lead  to  the  longest  term  of  office  —  upon  his  own  superior 
capacity,  more  constant  principle,  firmer  will,  and  clearer  vision. 

§  4.    The  Charge  of  Parliamentary  Corruption 

That  Walpole  practised  what  would  now  be  regarded  as  Parlia- 
mentary corruption  is  undeniable.  But  political  conduct  must  be 
judged  in  the  light  of  political  history.  Not  very  many  years  before 
Walpole  a  man  was  expected  to  pay  some  thousands  of  pounds 
for  being  made  Secretary  of  State,  just  as  down  to  our  own  time  he 
paid  for  being  made  colonel  of  a  regiment.  Many  years  after 
Walpole,  Lord  North  used  to  job  the  loans,  and  it  was  not  until  the 
younger  Pitt  set  a  loftier  example  that  any  minister  saw  the  least 
harm  in  keeping  a  portion  of  a  public  loan  in  his  own  hands  for 
distribution  among  his  private  friends.  For  the  minister  to  buy 
the  vote  of  a  member  of  Parliament  was  not  then  thought  much 


470  English  Historians 

more  rhameful  than  almost  down  to  our  own  time  it  has  been 
thought  shameful  for  a  member  of  Parliament  to  buy  the  vote  of 
an  elector.  Is  it  a  greater  sin  against  political  purity  to  give  a 
member  five  hundred  pounds  for  his  vote  than  to  advance  three 
thousand  for  the  purchase  of  his  seat?  Yet  even  the  austere  Pitt 
laughed,  as  Walpole  might  have  laughed  at  what  he  called  the 
squeamish  and  maiden  coyness  of  the  House  of  Commons,  in 
hesitating  to  admit  the  right  of  the  owners  of  rotten  boroughs  to 
be  compensated  for  the  disfranchisement  of  their  property.  It  is 
absurd  to  suppose  that  Walpole  first  tempted  mankind  into  rapac- 
ity and  selfishness.  Even  his  enemies  admitted  that  corruption 
had  been  gaining  ground  ever  since  the  time  of  Charles  II.  No- 
body denies  that  in  all  its  forms,  the  venality  alike  of  members 
and  constituencies  was  vastly  worse  thirty  years  after  VValpole's 
disappearance  than  anybody  ever  asserted  it  to  be  in  his  time.  To 
say,  with  some  modern  writers,  that  Walpole  organized  corruption 
as  a  system,  that  he  made  corruption  the  normal  process  of  Par- 
liamentary government,  that  he  governed  by  means  of  an  assembly 
which  was  saturated  with  corruption,  is  to  use  language  enor- 
mously in  excess  of  any  producible  evidence  and  of  all  legitimate 
inference.  It  is  to  attach  a  weight  to  the  furious  and  envenomed 
diatribes  of  the  Craftsman,,  to  which  the  very  violence  of  their 
language  shows  them  not  to  be  entitled.  With  unanswerable  force 
it  has  been  asked  by  Sir  Robert  Peel  and  other  men  of  experience 
in  public  affairs,  how  it  came  about  that  if  Walpole  did  really 
corrupt  his  age,  and  if  the  foundation  of  his  strength  was  the 
systematic  misapplication  of  the  public  money  to  the  purposes  of 
bribery,  yet  a  select  committee  of  twenty-one  members  —  nine- 
teen of  them  his  bitter  enemies  —  appointed  after  his  fall  to  lay  a 
siege  to  his  past  life  equal  in  duration  to  the  siege  of  Troy,  pro- 
duced no  specific  facts  to  support  the  allegations  of  bribery  which 
had  been  used  every  week  and  every  day  for  so  many  years  to  in- 
flame public  resentment  against  him?  Two  of  the  great  heads 
of  accusation  shrunk  up  to  miserable  dimensions  and  the  third 
remained  a  matter  of  vague  and  unsupported  inference.  Would 
so  lame  and  impotent  a  conclusion  have  been  possible  if  sub- 
stantial grounds  for  the  accusation  had  been  in  existence  ? 

The  charge  of  undue  influence  at  elections  ended  in  the  pro- 
duction of  a  mere  mouse  from  the  laboring  mountain.  Walpole 
appears  to  have  promised  the  mayor  a  place  in  the  revenue  service 
at  Weymouth,  in  order  to  secure  a  returning  officer  of  the  right 
color;  to  have  removed  some  customs  officers  who  declined  to 


Walpole  and  his  System  471 

vote  for  the  right  candidate,  and  to  have  disbursed  some  petty 
sums  for  legal  proceedings  in  boroughs.  We  find  nothing  like 
the  lavish  purchase  of  boroughs  that  was  practised  wholesale  by 
George  III,  and  which  explains  the  vast  debts  that  loaded  the 
civil  list  of  a  king  who  was  personally  the  most  frugal  of  men. 
Lord  North  thought  nothing  of  paying  Lord  Edgcumbe  £15,000 
for  his  boroughs,  or  buying  three  seats  from  Lord  Falmouth  for 
£7500,  though  the  bargain  nearly  went  off  because  he  would  not 
make  the  pounds  guineas.  Walpole  never  approached  such  a 
scale  as  this. 

§  5.   Peculation  and  Secret  Service  Money 

Nor,  again,  did  the  article  of  conceding  fraudulent  contracts 
produce  any  more  appalling  disclosure  than  that  in  the  single  case 
of  a  not  very  large  contract  for  payment  of  troops  in  Jamaica  the 
terms  had  been  suspiciously  handsome.  Finally,  the  grand  accu- 
sation of  peculation  and  profusion  in  the  expenditure  of  the  secret- 
service  money  can  be  placed  no  higher  than  a  doubtful  inference 
from  a  doubtful  figure.  The  committee  founded  their  case  on  the 
amount  of  the  secret-service  money.  That  amount  they  pro- 
nounced to  be  so  excessive  that  it  could  only  be  explained  by  a 
corrupt  and  improper  destination.  They  took  a  period  for  the 
purposes  of  comparison,  at  their  own  will  and  pleasure.  The 
secret-service  money  during  the  ten  years  from  1707  to  1717  only 
amounted  to  £338,000.  The  same  head  under  Walpole's  ad- 
minis'ration  from  1731  to  1741  was  no  less  than  £1,440,000. 
Therefore,  they  argued —  and  modern  writers  are  content  with  their 
argument — a  large  proportion  of  the  immense  expenditure  of  secret- 
service  money  in  Walpole's  government  was  devoted  to  the  direct 
purchase  of  members  of  Parliament.  The  premiss,  we  repeat, 
can  only  be  accepted  with  qualifications;  next,  even  if  the  premiss 
be  taken  as  offering  a  precisely  just  and  accurate  comparison, 
the  desired  conclusion  does  not  necessarily  or  even  reasonably 
follow  from  it.  The  ten  years  from  1707  to  1717  were  arbitrarily 
chosen ;  if  the  first  ten  years  of  Anne  or  of  George  I  had  been  taken, 
the  figure  would  have  been  much  higher,  and  therefore  more 
favorable  to  Walpole.  The  items  of  the  account,  moreover,  are 
taken  in  one  way,  in  order  to  attenuate  the  figure  of  the  first  period, 
and  in  another  way,  when  the  object  is  to  expand  the  figure  of  the 
second  period;  certain  payments  were  charged  to  the  secret-ser- 
vice fund  in  the  one  case,  which  in  the  other  case  had  either  not 


472  English  Historians 

been  made  or  else  had  gone  to  another  account.  The  compara- 
tive statement  is,  therefore,  fallacious.  Fairly  measured,  this 
branch  of  expenditure,  so  far  as  it  covered  a  really  secret  employ- 
ment of  money  which  it  would  be  against  the  interest  of  the  public 
service  to  disclose,  amounted  during  ten  years  of  Walpole's  admin- 
istration to  less  than  an  annual  average  of  £79,000;  and  that, 
according  to  Coxe,  is  much  less  than  the  sum  expended  for  similar 
purposes  during  a  similar  term  of  years  before  the  Revolution. 

Let  us,  however,  suppose  that  the  amount  was  even  higher  than 
this.  Why  are  we  to  assume  as  a  matter  of  course  that  most  of  it 
was  spent  in  buying  members  or  boroughs,  rather  than  in  the 
avowed  objects  of  buying  secret  intelligence  both  at  home  and  from 
abroad,  and  in  buying  foreign  ministers?  It  is  certain  that 
Walpole  was  always  singularly  well  informed  as  to  the  designs  of 
foreign  courts.  There  were  also  people  at  home  on  whom  it  was 
necessary  to  keep  a  still  more  vigilant  eye.  The  designs  of  Jaco- 
bite plotters  were  obscurer  and  more  intricate  than  the  diplomatic 
manoeuvres  of  Madrid,  Vienna,  or  Versailles.  Walpole  was  wisely 
willing  to  pay  handsomely  for  good  information  about  them.  It 
was  said  of  him  that  while  he  was  profuse  to  his  friends,  his  lib- 
erality was  literally  unbounded  to  his  tools  and  his  spies.  Even 
in  our  day,  no  British  minister  has  ventured  to  dispense  with  ser- 
vices of  this  odious  kind,  and  every  minister  still  very  properly 
refuses  to  account  to  Parliament  or  to  any  auditor  for  a  shilling 
of  it.  That  some  of  this  money  went  in  bribes  to  members  of 
Parliament,  it  would  be  childish  to  deny.  We  shall  presently 
come  upon  an  instance  where  £900  was  paid  to  two  members  of  the 
House  of  Commons  for  their  support.  Let  us  take  that  as  incon- 
trovertible. But  it  goes  a  very  little  way  towards  the  broad  accu- 
sation that  we  are  examining.  The  very  fact  that  the  king 
grumbled  loudly  at  the  transaction  which  cost  no  more  than  £900, 
shows  that  such  transactions  did  not  usually  mount  up  to  a  very 
large  proportion  of  one  £144,000  a  year.  The  one  detailed  case, 
therefore,  that  can  be  adduced  to  support  the  assumption  that 
most  of  the  secret-service  money  at  Walpole's  disposal  went  in 
Parliamentary  corruption,  itself  shows  that  the  assumption  is 
altogether  exaggerated  and  extravagant.  The  figures  prove  too 
much.  We  may  admit  that  the  gentlemen  who  had  taken  Wal- 
pole's money  would  be  likely  to  hold  their  peace  about  it,  and  we 
know  that  those  who  paid  the  money  were  authorized  by  the  king 
to  refuse  to  give  evidence.  Yet  when  all  allowance  has  been  made 
for  these  facts,  considering  how  many  scores  of  men  must  have 


Walpole  and  his  System  473 

been  secured,  what  enormous  sums  on  the  hypothesis  must  have 
passed,  and  how  passionately  ready  the  great  majority  of  the 
committee  were  to  procure  evidence  good  or  bad  at  any  price,  it  is 
surely  incredible  that,  if  corruption  had  been  practised  on  any- 
thing approaching  to  the  vast  and  systematic  scale  which  is  so 
loosely  imputed,  not  one  single  case  should  have  been  forthcoming. 

§  6.   The  Spoils  of  Office 

The  substance  of  the  charge  of  corruption  is  to  be  sought, 
not  in  occasional  payment  of  blackmail  to  a  member  or  a  patron, 
but  in  the  fact  that  he  reserved  the  crown  patronage  down  to  the 
last  morsel,  exclusively  for  members  of  his  own  party.  He  acted 
on  the  principle  that  is  accepted  in  the  United  States,  that  is  not 
disavowed  in  France,  and  that,  although  disavowed  in  Great  Brit- 
ain, has  not  even  yet  wholly  disappeared  there.  A  member  of 
Parliament  who  desired  anything,  from  a  lucrative  office  for  himself 
down  to  a  place  as  tide-waiter  for  the  son  of  a  tenant,  knew  that 
his  only  chance  would  be  to  support  the  administration.  The 
number  of  offices  held  by  men  in  Parliament  was  very  great. 
When  Burke  introduced  his  famous  scheme  of  economical  reform 
(1780),  he  boasted  that  it  would  destroy  influence  equal  to  the 
offices  of  at  least  fifty  members  of  Parliament.  In  Walpole's  time 
the  number  of  place  holders  at  the  pleasure  of  the  court  must  have 
been  considerably  in  excess  of  fifty;  for  the  place  bill  of  1743  had 
excluded  a  certain  number  of  subordinate  personages  from  seats 
in  Parliament.  Walpole  insisted  that  all  these  gentlemen  should 
be  sound  Whigs.  To  that  extent,  acting  especially  on  the  owners 
of  boroughs,  he  systematically  affected  the  disinterestedness  and 
independence  of  the  House  of  Commons. 

§  7.    The  Price  of  Men 

Walpole  has  no  doubt  suffered  much  in  the  opinion  of  posterity 
as  the  supposed  author  of  the  shallow  and  cynical  apophthegm, 
that  "every  man  has  his  price."  People  who  know  nothing  about 
Walpole  believe  and  repeat  this  about  him.  Yet  the  story  is  a 
pure  piece  of  misinterpretation.  He  never  delivered  himself 
of  that  famous  slander  on  mankind.  One  day,  mocking  the 
flowery  and  declamatory  professions  of  some  of  the  patriots  in 
opposition,  he  insisted  on  finding  self-interest  or  family  interest 
at  the  bottom  of  their  fine  things.  "All  these  men,"  he  said,  "have 


474  English  Historians 

their  price."  "  As  to  the  revolters,"  he  told  the  king,  "I  know  the 
reasons  and  I  know  the  price  of  every  one  of  them."  Nor  was  he 
wrong,  as  time  showed.  It  was  not  a  general  but  a  particular 
proposition,  and  as  a  particular  proposition  it  was  true.  When 
an  honest  man  came  in  his  way,  Walpole  knew  him  well  enough. 
"I  will  not  say,"  he  observed,  "who  is  corrupt;  but  I  will  say  who 
is  not,  and  that  is  Shippen."  And  yet  "honest  Shippen  "  was  one 
of  the  stoutest  of  his  opponents. 

§  8.  The  Evidence  against  Walpole 

The  absence  of  any  tangible  evidence  of  novel,  extraordinary, 
lavish,  and  widespread  Parliamentary  corruption  on  Walpole's 
part  only  coincides  with  the  best  positive  testimony  that  we  can 
get.  Pitt,  who  was  one  of  the  most  vehement  promoters  of  the 
secret  committee,  five  years  later  publicly  acquitted  Walpole 
of  the  worst  of  the  charges  brought  against  him,  in  terms  ample 
enough  to  satisfy  the  late  minister's  own  sons.  Burke,  again, 
says  that  it  was  his  fortune  to  converse  with  many  of  the  principal 
actors  against  Walpole,  and  to  examine  with  care  original  docu- 
ments concerning  important  transactions  of  those  times.  His 
writings,  as  everybody  knows,  contain  more  than  one  passage, 
showing  that  he  had  informed  himself  about  Walpole's  character 
and  acts;  and  in  truth  much  of  the  great  writer's  theoretic  wisdom 
is  but  the  splendid  generalization  of  the  great  minister's  particular 
policy  and  practice.  What  Burke  has  to  say  on  the  point  that  we 
are  now  discussing  is  this:  "Walpole  was  an  honorable  man  and 
a  sound  Whig.  He  was  not,  as  the  Jacobites  and  discontented 
Whigs  of  his  own  time  have  represented  him,  and  as  ill-informed 
people  still  represent  him,  a  prodigal  and  corrupt  minister.  They 
charged  him,  in  their  libels  and  seditious  conversations,  as  having 
first  reduced  corruption  to  a  system.  Such  was  their  cant.  But 
he  was  far  from  governing  by  corruption.  He  governed  by  party 
attachments.  The  charge  of  systematic  corruption  is  less  ap- 
plicable to  him,  perhaps,  than  to  any  minister  who  ever  served  the 
crown  for  so  great  a  length  of  time.  He  gained  over  very  few  from 
the  opposition."-—  (Appeal  from  New  to  Old  Whigs.)  Evidence 
of  this  kind,  coming  from  a  man  of  affairs  in  the  generation 
immediately  following,  in  contact  with  some  actors  in  those  events 
and  with  many  who  must  have  known  about  them  at  first  hand, 
must  outweigh  any  amount  of  sweeping  presumptions  by  histori- 
ans writing  a  century  and  a  half  after  Walpole's  fall.  The  part 


Walpole  and  his  System  475 

and  proportion  of  corruption  in  Walpole's  management  of  members 
is  to  be  gathered  from  what  he  did  to  secure  the  rejection  of  the 
bill  for  lowering  the  interest  on  the  funds.  He  got  time  enough, 
says  Hervey,  "to  go  about  to  talk  to  people,  to  solicit,  to  intimidate, 
to  argue,  to  persuade,  and  perhaps  to  bribe."  This  may  be  taken 
as  a  fair  example  of  his  usual  practice.  Bribery  was  an  expedient 
in  the  last  resort,  and  the  appeal  to  cupidity  came  after  appeals 
to  friendship,  to  fear,  to  reason,  and  to  all  those  mixed  motives, 
creditable,  permissible,  and  equivocal,  which  guide  votes  in  re- 
formed and  unreformed  Parliaments  alike. 

§  9.   Walpole's  Private  Affairs 

The  pecuniary  affairs  of  public  men  are  no  concern  of  the  out- 
side world,  unless  they  are  tainted  with  improbity.  So  many 
charges  were  made  against  Walpole  under  this  head,  that,  it  is 
necessary  to  glance  at  them.  I  shall  begin  with  the  least  serious. 
Very  early  in  his  career  of  minister  Walpole  was  taunted  with 
abusing  his  patronage  by  granting  places  and  reversions  of  places 
to  his  relatives.  When  his  son  Horace  was  little  more  than  a  child, 
he  was  made  Clerk  of  the  Estreats  and  Controller  of  the  Pipe,  with 
a  salary  of  £300  a  year.  At  the  age  of  eighteen  or  nineteen,  he 
became  Inspector  of  Customs ;  on  resigning  that  post  a  year  later, 
he  was  made  Usher  of  the  Exchequer,  then  worth  £900  a  year; 
and  Horace  Walpole  was  able  to  boast  that  from  the  age  of  twenty 
he  was  no  charge  to  his  family.  The  duty  of  the  usher  was  to 
furnish  paper,  pens,  ink,  wax,  sand,  tape,  penknives,  scissors,  and 
parchment  to  the  Exchequer,  and  the  profits  rose  from  £900  a  year 
to  an  average  of  double  that  amount.  The  post  of  Collector  of  the 
Customs,  worth  nearly  ^2000  a  year,  was  granted  to  Walpole  him- 
self, and  for  the  lives  of  Robert  and  Edward  his  sons.  The  bulk 
of  the  proceeds  of  this  patent  he  devised  to  his  son  Horace.  In 
1721  the  minister  made  his  eldest  son  Clerk  of  the  Pells,  with  three 
thousand  a  year;  and  in  1739  he  gave  him  the  gigantic  prize  of 
Auditor  of  the  Exchequer,  with  a  salary  of  seven  thousand.  Then 
when  the  eldest  son  resigned  the  pells  on  receiving  the  auditor- 
ship,  the  pells  and  the  three  thousand  a  year  went  to  Edward 
Walpole,  the  next  brother.  All  these  great  patent  offices 
were  sinecures ;  they  were  always  executed  by  deputy ;  the 
principal  had  not  a  week's  work  to  do  from  the  first  annual 
quarter  day  to  the  last.  We  can  imagine  how  these  rank 
abominations  would  stink  in  the  nostrils  of  the  House  of  Commons 


476  English   Historians 

and  the  Treasury  to-day.  Yet  it  is  worth  remembering  that  Burke, 
when  he  proposed  his  famous  plan  of  economical  reform  (1780), 
though  he  admitted  that  the  magnitude  of  the  profits  in  the  great 
patent  offices  called  for  reformation,  still  looked  with  complacency 
on  an  exchequer  list  filled  with  the  descendants  of  the  Walpoles, 
the  Pelhams,  and  the  Townshends,  and  maintained  the  expediency 
of  these  indirect  provisions  for  the  families  of  great  public  servants. 
Indirect  rewards  have  long  disappeared,  and  nothing  is  more 
certain  than  that  the  whole  system  of  political  pension,  even  as  a 
direct  and  personal  reward,  is  drawing  to  an  end.  Whether  either 
the  purity  or  the  efficiency  of  political  service  will  gain  by  the 
change  is  not  so  certain.  Walpole  at  least  can  hardly  be  censured 
for  doing  what,  in  the  very  height  of  his  zeal  for  reform,  Burke 
seriously  and  deliberately  defended. 

Abuse  of  patronage,  however,  was  the  least  formidable  of  the 
charges  that  descended  year  after  year  in  a  storm  on  Walpole's 
head.  He  was  roundly  and  constantly  charged  with  sustaining  a 
lavish  private  expenditure  by  peculation  from  public  funds. 
The  palace  which  he  built  for  himself  in  Norfolk  was  matter  fcr 
endless  scandal.  He  planted  gardens,  people  said,  in  places  to 
which  the  very  earth  had  to  be  transported  in  wagons.  He  set 
fountains  flowing  and  cascades  tumbling,  where  water  was  to  be 
conveyed  by  long  acqueducts  and  costly  machines.  He  was  a 
modern  Sardanapalus,  imitating  the  extravagance  cf  Oriental 
monarchs  at  the  expense  of  a  free  people  whom  he  was  at  cnce 
impoverishing  and  betraying.  They  described  him  as  going  down 
to  his  country  seat  loaded  with  the  spoils  of  an  unfortunate  nation. 
He  had  purchased  most  of  the  county  of  Norfolk,  and  held  at  least 
one-half  of  the  stock  of  the  Bank  of  England.  It  was  plainly 
hinted  that  in  view  of  a  possible  impeachment  at  seme  future  day, 
he  had  made  himself  safe  by  investing  £150,000  in  jewels  and  plate 
as  an  easily  portable  form  of  wealth.  He  had  also  secretly  de- 
spatched £400,000  in  a  single  year  to  bankers  at  Amsterdam, 
Vienna,  Genoa,  to  be  ready  for  him  in  case  of  untoward  accidents. 

These  lively  fabrications  undoubtedly  represented  the  common 
rumor  and  opinion  of  the  time,  and  were  excellently  fitted  to  nour- 
ish the  popular  dislike  with  which  Walpole  came  to  be  regarded. 
They  had  their  origin  in  the  same  suspicious  temper  toward  an 
unpopular  minister,  which  two  generations  before  had  made  the 
people  of  London  give  to  Clarendon's  new  palace  in  Piccadilly 
the  name  of  Dunkirk  House,  and  which  a  generation  later  prompted 
the  charge  that  Lord  Bute's  great  house  and  park  at  Luton  had 


Walpole  and  his  System  477 

come  out  of  the  bribes  of  France.  They  had  hardly  more  solid 
foundation  than  the  charge  of  saturating  Parliament  with  corrup- 
tion. The  truth  seems  to  be  that  Walpole,  like  both  the  Pitts,  was 
inexact  and  careless  about  money.  Profusion  was  a  natural 
element  in  a  large,  loose,  jovial  character  like  his,  too  incessantly 
preoccupied  with  business,  power,  government,  and  high  affairs 
of  State  to  have  much  regard  for  a  wise  private  economy.  He 
was  supposed  to  contribute  handsomely  toward  the  expense  of 
fighting  elections.  He  expended  in  building,  adding,  and  improv- 
ing at  Houghton  the  sum  of  £200,000.  He  built  a  lodge  in 
Richmond  Park  at  a  cost  of  £14,000.  His  famous  hunting  con- 
gresses are  said  to  have  come  to  £3000  a  year  —  rather  a  moderate 
sum,  according  to  the  standard  of  to-day,  for  keeping  open  house 
for  a  whole  county  for  several  weeks  in  a  vast  establishment  like 
Houghton.  His  collection  of  pictures  was  set  down  by  Horace 
Walpole  as  having  cost  him  £40,000  more ;  but  this  I  suspect  to  be 
a  very  doubtful  figure,  for  according  to  a  contemporary  letter  in 
Nichol's  Literary  Anecdotes,  so  many  of  the  pictures  were  presents, 
that  the  whole  cost  could  hardly  have  reached  £30,000;  and  it 
is  worth  noting  that  the  famous  Guido,  the.  gem  of  the  collection, 
while  it  cost  him  some  £600,  was  valued  in  the  catalogue  when  it 
came  to  be  sold  to  the  Czarina  at  £3500.  For  all  this  outlay,  his 
foes  contended  that  the  income  of  his  estate  and  the  known  salary 
of  his  offices  were  inadequate.  They  assumed,  therefore,  that  the 
requisite  funds  were  acquired  by  the  sale  of  honors,  places,  and 
pensions,  and  by  the  plunder  of  the  secret-service  money. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Stanhope  (Lord  Mahon),  History  of  England  from  1713  to  1783,  Vol.  Ill, 
chap.,xxiv.  Lecky,  History  of  England  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  Vol.  I, 
chaps,  ii  and  iii.  Cox,  Memoirs  of  the  Life  and  Administration  of  Walpole. 
an  old  but  valuable  work.  Ewald,  Sir  Robert  Walpole. 


CHAPTER  H 

JOHN   WESLEY   AND   METHODISM 

IT  is  generally  admitted  by  historians  that  the  religious  life  of 
the  early  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  was  marked  by  indifference 
and  scepticism.  Clergymen  in  the  Established  and  Dissenting 
churches  emphasized  the  intellect  rather  than  the  feelings  in 
religion ;  heated  theological  controversies  and  polemical  pamphlet- 
eering fell  out  of  fashion ;  instead  of  revelation  or  authority  alone, 
theologians  emphasized  reason  as  the  guide  to  religious  truth. 
Voltaire,  who  had  been  in  England,  described  an  English  sermon  of 
the  age  as  a  "solid  but  sometimes  dry  dissertation  which  a  man 
reads  to  the  people  without  gesture  and  without  particular  exaltation 
of  the  voice."  Another  French  visitor,  Montesquieu,  declared 
that  there  was  no  religion  in  England,  and  that  the  mention  of  it 
excited  laughter.  Even  a  distinguished  bishop  of  the  Church, 
Berkeley,  wrote  that  cold  indifference  for  all  matters  of  faith  and 
divine  worship  was  thought  good  sense,  and  that  it  was  so  fashion- 
able to  deny  religion  that  a  good  Christian  could  hardly  keep 
himself  in  countenance  when  it  was  mentioned.  Though  the 
religion  of  an  age  is  difficult  to  measure  and  these  sweeping  state- 
ments of  contemporaries  must  be  taken  with  caution,  there  can  be 
no  doubt  that,  as  a  vital  force  in  the  lives  of  men,  religion  was  at  a 
very  low  ebb.  The  lower  classes  were  often  coarse  and  brutal  in 
their  habits,  and  they  do  not  seem  to  have  been  reached  by  the 
ordinary  sermons.  It  was  under  such  conditions  that  there  origi- 
nated in  England  a  religious  awakening  that  was  destined  to 
become  one  of  the  most  powerful  movements  in  the  history  of 
Christianity.  Many  accounts  have  been  written  about  this  move- 
ment and  its  founders,  but  most  of  them  have  been  seriously  biassed 

478 


John  Wesley  and  Methodism  479 

by  the  convictions  of  the  authors.     A  very  fair  view  is  to  be  found  in 
Mr.  Lecky's  great  work  on  the  eighteenth  century. 

§  i .  John  Wesley  and  the  Oxford  Group  l 

The  Methodist  movement  was  a  purely  religious  one.  All  ex- 
planations which  ascribe  it  to  the  ambition  of  its  leaders,  or  to 
merely  intellectual  causes,  are  at  variance  with  the  facts  of  the  case. 
The  term  Methodist  was  a  college  nickname  bestowed  upon  a 
small  society  of  students  at  Oxford,  who  met  together  between  1729 
and  1735  for  the  purpose  of  mutual  improvement.  They  were 
accustomed  to  communicate  every  week,  to  fast  regularly  on 
Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  and  on  most  days  during  Lent,  to  read 
and  discuss  the  Bible  in  common,  to  abstain  from  most  forms  of 
amusement  and  luxury,  and  to  visit  sick  persons  and  prisoners  in 
the  jail. 

John  Wesley,  the  master  spirit  of  this  society,  and  the  future 
leader  of  the  religious  revival  of  the  eighteenth  century,  was  born 
in  1703,  and  was  the  second  surviving  son  of  Samuel  Wesley,  the 
rector  of  Ep worth,  in  Lincolnshire.  His  father,  who  had  early 
abandoned  Non-conformity,  and  acquired  some  reputation  by  many 
works  both  in  prose  and  verse,  had  obtained  his  living  from  the 
government  of  William,  and  had  led  for  many  years  a  useful  and 
studious  life,  maintaining  a  far  higher  standard  of  clerical  duty 
than  was  common  in  his  time.  His  mother  was  the  daughter  of  an 
eminent  Non-conformist  minister,  who  had  been  ejected  in  1662, 
and  was  a  woman  of  rare  mental  endowments,  of  intense  piety, 
and  of  a  strong,  original,  and  somewhat  stern  character.  Their 
home  was  not  a  happy  one.  Discordant  dispositions  and  many 
troubles  darkened  it.  The  family  was  very  large.  Many  chil- 
dren died  early.  The  father  sank  slowly  into  debt.  His  parish- 
ioners were  fierce,  profligate,  and  recalcitrant.  When  John  Wesley 
was  only  six  years  old  the  rectory  was  burnt  to  the  ground,  and  the 
child  was  forgotten  among  the  flames,  and  only  saved  at  the  last 
moment  by  what  he  afterward  deemed  an  extraordinary  Provi- 
dence. All  these  circumstances  doubtless  deepened  the  natural 
and  inherited  piety  for  which  he  was  so  remarkable,  and  some 
strange  and  unexplained  noises  which  during  a  long  period  were 
heard  in  the  rectory,  and  which  its  inmates  concluded  to  be 

1  Lecky,  History  of  England  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  Cabinet  Edition, 
Vol.  Ill,  pp.  37  ff.  By  permission  of  D.  Appleton  &  Company,  Pub- 
lishers. 


480  English  Historians 

supernatural,  contributed  to  that  vein  of  credulity  which  ran 
through  his  character. 

He  was  sent  to  the  Charterhouse,  and  from  thence  to  Oxford, 
where  at  the  age  of  twenty-three  he  was  elected  fellow  of  Lincoln. 
He  had  some  years  before  acquired  from  his  brother  a  certain 
knowledge  of  Hebrew,  and  he  was  speedily  distinguished  by  his 
extraordinary  logical  powers,  by  the  untiring  industry  with  which 
he  threw  himself  into  the  studies  of  the  place,  and  above  all  by 
the  force  and  energy  of  his  character.  His  religious  impressions, 
which  had  been  for  a  time  somewhat  obscured,  revived  in  their 
full  intensity  while  he  was  preparing  for  ordination  in  1725.  He 
was  troubled  with  difficulties,  which  his  father  and  mother  gradu- 
ally removed,  about  the  damnatory  clauses  in  the  Athanasian 
Creed,  and  about  the  compatibility  of  the  Articles  with  his  de- 
cidedly Arminian  views  concerning  election,  and  he  was  deeply 
influenced  by  the  Imitation  of  Thomas  a  Kempis,  by  the  Holy 
Living  and  Dying  of  Jeremy  Taylor,  and  by  Law's  Serious  Call. 
His  life  at  Oxford  became  very  strict.  He  rose  every  morning  at 
four,  a  practice  which  he  continued  until  extreme  old  age.  He 
made  pilgrimages  on  foot  to  William  Law  to  ask  for  spiritual 
advice.  He  abstained  from  the  usual  fashion  of  having  his  hair 
dressed,  in  order  that  he  might  give  the  money  so  saved  to  the  poor. 
He  refused  to  return  the  visits  of  those  who  called  on  him,  that  he 
might  avoid  all  idle  conversation.  His  fasts  were  so  severe  that 
they  seriously  impaired  his  health,  and  extreme  abstinence  and 
gloomy  views  about  religion  are  said  to  have  contributed  largely 
to  hurry  one  of  the  closest  of  his  college  companions  to  an  early 
and  clouded  death. 

The  society  hardly  numbered  more  than  fifteen  members,  and 
was  the  object  of  much  ridicule  at  the  university ;  but  it  included 
some  men  who  afterward  played  considerable  parts  in  the  world. 
Among  them  was  Charles,  the  younger  brother  of  John  Wesley, 
whose  hymns  became  the  favorite  poetry  of  the  sect,  and  whose 
gentler,  more  submissive,  and  more  amiable  character,  though 
less  fitted  than  that  of  his  brother  for  the  great  conflicts  of  public 
life,  was  very  useful  in  moderating  the  movement,  and  in  drawing 
converts  to  it  by  personal  influence.  Charles  Wesley  appears  to 
have  originated  the  society  at  Oxford ;  he  brought  Whitefield  into 
its  pale,  and  besides  being  the  most  popular  poet  he  was  one  of  the 
most  persuasive  preachers  of  the  movement. 

There  too,  above  all,  was  George  Whitefield,  in  after  years  the 
greatest  pulpit  orator  of  England.  He  was  born  in  1714,  in 


John  Wesley  and  Methodism  481 

Gloucester,  in  the  Bell  Inn,  of  which  his  mother  was  proprietor, 
and  where  upon  the  decline  of  her  fortunes  he  was  for  some  time 
employed  in  servile  functions.  He  had  been  a  wild,  impulsive  boy, 
alternately  remarkable  for  many  mischievous  pranks  and  for 
strange  outbursts  of  religious  zeal.  He  stole  money  from  his 
mother,  and  he  gave  part  of  it  to  the  poor.  He  early  declared  his 
intention  one  day  to  preach  the  Gospel,  but  he  was  the  terror  of 
the  Dissenting  minister  of  his  neighborhood,  whose  religious  ser- 
vices he  was  accustomed  to  ridicule  and  interrupt.  He  bought 
devotional  books,  read  the  Bible  assiduously,  and  on  one  occasion, 
when  exasperated  by  some  teasing,  he  relieved  his  feelings,  as  he 
tells  us,  by  pouring  out  in  his  solitude  the  menaces  of  the  n8th 
Psalm ;  but  he  was  also  passionately  fond  of  card-playing,  novel- 
reading,  and  the  theatre,  he  was  two  or  three  times  intoxicated, 
and  he  confesses  with  much  penitence  "  to  a  sensual  passion  "  for 
fruits  and  cakes.  His  strongest  natural  bias  was  toward  the  stage. 
He  indulged  it  on  every  possible  occasion,  and  at  school  he  wrote 
plays  and  acted  in  a  female  part. 

Owing  to  the  great  poverty  of  his  mother  he  could  only  go  to 
Oxford  as  a  servitor,  and  his  career  there  was  a  very  painful  one. 
Thomas  a  Kempis,  Drelincourt's  Defence  against  Death,  and  Law's 
devotional  works  had  all  their  part  in  kindling  his  piety  into  a 
flame.  He  was  haunted  with  gloomy  and  superstitious  fancies, 
and  his  religion  assumed  the  darkest  and  most  ascetic  character. 
He  always  chose  the  worst  food,  fasted  twice  a  week,  wore  woollen 
gloves,  a  patched  gown,  and  dirty  shoes,  and  was  subject  to 
paroxvsms  of  a  morbid  devotion.  He  remained  for  hours  pros- 
trate on  the  ground  in  Christ's  Church  walk  in  the  midst  of  the 
night,  and  continued  his  devotions  till  his  hands  grew  black  with 
cold.  One  Lent  he  carried  his  fasting  to  such  a  point  that  when 
Passion  Week  arrived  he  had  hardly  sufficient  strength  to  creep 
upstairs,  and  his  memory  was  seriously  impaired.  In  1733  he 
came  in  contact  with  Charles  Wesley,  who  brought  him  into  the 
society.  To  a  work  called  The  Life  of  God  in  the  Soul  of  Man, 
which  Charles  Wesley  put  into  his  hands,  he  ascribed  his  first 
conviction  of  that  doctrine  of  free  salvation  which  he  afterward 
made  it  the  great  object  of  his  life  to  teach.  .  .  . 

§  2.   The  Conversion  of  John  Wesley 

[At  the  invitation  of  General  Oglethorpe,  John  Wesley  left  Ox- 
ford in  1737  to  go  out  as  pastor  and  missionary  to  the  former's 

21 


482  English  Historians 

colony  of  Georgia,  recently  established  as  a  refuge  for  imprisoned 
debtors  and  unfortunate  classes  of  Europe.  He  was  sadly  dis- 
appointed with  the  Indians  whom  he  hoped  to  convert,  declaring 
them  to  be  "gluttons,  thieves,  dissemblers,  and  liars."  More- 
over his  work  with  the  colonists  was  not  altogether  successful,  and 
he  returned  to  England  after  a  stay  of  two  years.  For  sometime 
afterward  he  was  sorely  troubled  by  what  seemed  to  him  the 
inadequacy  of  his  religion,  and  longed  for  "that  faith  which  none 
can  have  without  knowing  that  he  hath  it."] 

This  condition  could  not  last  long.  At  length,  on  May  24,  —  a 
day  which  he  ever  after  looked  back  upon  as  the  most  momentous 
in  his  life,  — the  cloud  was  dispelled.  Early  in  the  morning,  accord- 
ing to  his  usual  custom,  he  opened  the  Bible  at  random,  seeking 
for  a  Divine  guidance,  and  his  eye  lighted  on  the  words,  "There 
are  given  unto  us  exceeding  great  and  pjecious  promises,  even  that 
ye  should  be  partakers  of  the  Divine  nature."  Before  he  left  the 
house  he  again  consulted  the  oracle,  and  the  first  words  he  read 
were,  "Thou  art  not  far  from  the  kingdom  of  God."  In  the 
afternoon  he  attended  services  in  St.  Paul's  Cathedral,  and  the  an- 
them, to  his  highly  wrought  imagination,  seemed  a  repetition  of  the 
same  hope.  The  sequel  may  be  told  in  his  own  words.  "In  the 
evening  I  went  very  unwillingly  to  a  society  in  Aldersgate  Street, 
where  one  was  reading  Luther's  preface  to  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans.  About  a  quarter  before  nine,  while  he  was  describing 
the  change  which  God  works  in  the  heart  through  faith  in  Christ, 
I  felt  my  heart  strangely  warmed,  I  felt  I  did  trust  in  Christ,  Christ 
alone,  for  salvation,  and  an  assurance  was  given  me  that  he  had 
taken  away  my  sins,  even  mine,  and  saved  me  from  the  law  of  sin 
and  death.  I  began  to  pray  with  all  my  might  for  those  who  had 
in  a  more  especial  manner  despitefully  used  me  and  persecuted  me. 
I  then  testified  openly  to  all,  what  I  now  first  felt  in  my  heart."  .  .  . 

§  3.   The  Methodist  Missionaries  at  Work 

Having  rid  himself  of  harassing  doubts  on  cardinal  points  of 
his  religious  faith,  John  Wesley  became  a  fervent  preacher,  em- 
phasizing salvation  through  faith  in  Christ,  personal  relations  of 
believer  and  God,  and  definite  conversion.  He  preached  in  the 
churches  which  were  open  to  him  and  soon  roused  violent  opposi- 
tion by  the  fervor  of  his  declamation.  He  was  soon  joined  by 


John  Wesley  and   Methodism  483 

Whitefield  and  his  brother  Charles  Wesley,  and  the  three,  with  the 
followers  who  soon  gathered  about  them,  began  the  Herculean  task 
of  rousing  all  England  to  a  new  interpretation  of  religious  life. 

The  leaders  of  the  movement  became  the  most  active  of  mission- 
aries. Without  any  fixed  parishes  they  wandered  from  place  to 
place,  proclaiming  their  new  doctrine  in  every  pulpit  to  which 
they  were  admitted,  and  they  speedily  awoke  a  passionate  enthusi- 
asm and  a  bitter  hostility  in  the  Church.  Nothing,  indeed,  could 
appear  more  irregular  to  the  ordinary  parochial  clergyman  than 
these  itinerant  ministers,  who  broke  away  violently  from  the 
settled  habits  of  their  profession,  who  belonged  to  and  worshipped 
in  small  religious  societies  that  bore  a  suspicious  resemblance  to 
conventicles,  and  whose  whole  tone  and  manner  of  preaching  were 
utterly  unlike  anything  to  which  he  was  accustomed.  They  taught, 
in  language  of  the  most  vehement  emphasis,  as  the  cardinal  tenet 
of  Christianity,  the  doctrine  of  a  new  birth  in  a  form  which  was 
altogether  novel  to  their  hearers.  They  were  never  weary  of  urging 
that  all  men  are  in  a  condition  of  damnation  who  have  not  expe- 
rienced a  sudden,  violent,  and  supernatural  change,  or  of  in- 
veighing against  the  clergy  for  their  ignorance  of  the  very  essence 
of  Christianity. 

"Tillotson,"  in  the  words  of  Whitefield,  "knew  no  more  about 
true  Christianity  than  Mahomet."  The  Whole  Duty  of  Man, 
which  was  the  most  approved  devotional  manual  of  the  time,  was 
pronounced  by  the  same  preacher,  on  account  of  the  stress  it  laid 
upon  good  works,  to  have  "sent  thousands  to  hell."  The  Metho- 
dist preacher  came  to  an  Anglican  parish  in  the  spirit,  and  with 
the  language,  of  a  missionary  going  to  the  most  ignorant  heathen ; 
and  he  asked  the  clergyman  of  the  parish  to  lend  him  his  pulpit, 
in  order  that  he  might  instruct  the  parishioners  —  perhaps  for  the 
first  time  —  in  the  true  Gospel  of  Christ.  It  is  not  surprising  that 
the  clergy  should  have  resented  such  a  movement,  and  the  manner 
of  the  missionary  was  as  startling  as  his  matter.  The  sermons 
of  the  time  were,  as  I  have  said,  almost  always  written,  and  the 
prevailing  taste  was  cold,  polished,  and  fastidious. 

The  new  preachers  preached  extempore,  with  the  most  intense 
fervor  of  language  and  gesture,  and  usually  with  a  complete  dis- 
regard of  the  conventionalities  of  their  profession.  WTesley  fre- 
quently mounted  the  pulpit  without  even  knowing  from  what  text 
he  would  preach,  believing  that  when  he  opened  the  Bible  at  ran- 
dom the  Divine  Spirit  would  guide  him  infallibly  in  his  choice. 
The  oratory  of  Whitefield  was  so  impassioned  that  the  preacher  was 


484  English  Historians 

sometimes  scarcely  able  to  proceed  for  his  tears,  while  half  the 
audience  were  convulsed  with  sobs.  The  love  of  order,  routine, 
and  decorum,  which  was  the  strongest  feeling  in  the  clerical  mind, 
was  violently  shocked.  The  regular  congregation  was  displaced 
by  an  agitated  throng,  who  had  never  before  been  seen  within  the 
precincts  of  the  Church.  The  usual  quiet  worship  was  disturbed 
by  violent  enthusiasm  or  violent  opposition,  by  hysterical  parox- 
ysms of  devotion  or  remorse,  and  when  the  preacher  had  left 
the  parish  he  seldom  failed  to  leave  behind  him  the  elements  of 
agitation  and  division.  .  .  . 

The  success  of  Methodism  depended  upon  the  zeal  and  abilities 
of  its  leaders,  upon  the  evangelical  doctrines  which  they  had  re- 
vived, and  which  were  peculiarly  fitted  to  exercise  a  deep  influence 
upon  the  people,  and  upon  the  institution  of  field-preaching,  which 
brought  those  doctrines  before  vast  multitudes  who  had  scarcely  be- 
fore come  into  any  contact  with  religion.  The  great  difficulty  was 
the  small  number  of  the  teachers  and  the  general  hostility  of  the 
clergy,  but  this  was  remedied  in  the  beginning  of  1741  by  the 
institution  of  lay  preachers.  Nelson  and  Maxfield  were  the  two 
earliest.  They  had  begun  preaching  in  the  preceding  year  without 
authorization  and  apparently  without  concert,  under  the  impulse 
of  an  overpowering  missionary  enthusiasm ;  and  it  was  only  very 
reluctantly,  and  chiefly  in  obedience  to  the  advice  of  his  mother, 
that  Wesley  consented  to  sanction  the  step. 

From  the  time  of  the  institution  of  lay  preachers,  Methodism 
became  in  a  great  degree  independent  of  the  Established  Church. 
Its  chapels  multiplied  in  the  great  towns,  and  its  itinerant  mission- 
aries penetrated  to  the  most  secluded  districts.  They  were  accus- 
tomed to  preach  in  fields  and  gardens,  in  streets  and  lecture-rooms, 
in  market-places  and  churchyards.  On  one  occasion  we  find 
Whitefield  at  a  fair  mounting  a  stage  which  had  been  erected  for 
some  wrestlers,  and  there  denouncing  the  pleasures  of  the  world ; 
on  another,  preaching  among  the  mountebanks  at  Moorfields ;  on 
a  third,  attracting  around  his  pulpit  ten  thousand  of  the  spectators 
at  a  race  course;  on  a  fourth,  standing  beside  the  gallows  at  an 
execution  to  speak  of  death  and  of  eternity.  Wesley,  when  ex- 
cluded from  the  pulpit  of  Epworth,  delivered  some  of  his  most 
impressive  sermons  in  the  churchyard,  standing  on  his  father's 
tomb.  Howell  Harris,  the  apostle  of  Wales,  encountering  a  party 
of  mountebanks,  sprang  into  their  midst  exclaiming  in  a  solemn 
voice  "Let  us  pray,"  and  then  proceeded  to  thunder  forth  the 
judgments  of  the  Lord.  Rowland  Hill  was  accustomed  to  visit 


John  Wesley  and  Methodism  485 

the  great  towns  on  market-day  in  order  that  he  might  address  the 
people  in  the  market-place,  and  to  go  from  fair  to  fair  preaching 
among  the  revellers  from  his  favorite  text,  "Come  out  from 
among  them." 

§  4.   Opposition  to  the  Missionaries 

In  this  manner  the  Methodist  preachers  came  in  contact  with 
the  most  savage  elements  of  the  population,  and  there  were  few 
forms  of  mob  violence  they  did  not  experience.  In  1741  one  of 
their  preachers  named  Seward,  after  repeated  ill-treatment  in  Wales, 
was  at  last  struck  on  the  head  while  preaching  at  Monmouth,  and 
died  of  the  blow.  In  a  riot,  while  Wheatley  was  preaching  at 
Norwich,  a  poor  woman  with  child  perished  from  the  kicks  and 
blows  of  the  mob.  At  Wednesbury  —  a  little  town  in  Stafford- 
shire —  then  very  famous  for  its  cock  fights,  numerous  houses 
were  wrecked,  the  Methodists  were  stoned,  beaten  with  cudgels, 
or  dragged  through  the  public  kennels.  Women  were  atrociously 
abused.  The  leaders  of  the  mob  declared  their  intention  to  de- 
stroy every  Methodist  in  the  county.  Wesley  himself  appeared  in 
the  town,  and  the  rioters  speedily  surrounded  the  house  where  he 
was  staying.  With  the  placid  courage  that  never  deserted  him  in 
danger,  he  descended  alone  and  unarmed  into  their  midst.  His 
perfect  calmness  and  his  singularly  venerable  appearance  quelled 
the  most  noisy,  and  he  succeeded  by  a  few  well-chosen  words  in 
producing  a  sudden  reaction.  His  captors,  however,  insisted  on 
his  accompanying  them  to  a  neighboring  justice,  who  exhorted 
them  to  disperse  in  peace.  The  night  had  now  fallen,  and  Wesley 
was  actually  returning  to  Wednesbury  protected  by  a  portion  of 
the  very  crowd  which  had  attacked  him,  when  a  new  mob  poured 
in  from  an  adjoining  village.  He  was  seized  by  the  hair  and 
dragged  through  the  streets.  Some  struck  at  him  with  cudgels. 
Many  cried  to  knock  out  his  brains  and  kill  him  at  once.  A  river 
was  flowing  near,  and  he  imagined  that  they  would  throw  him  into 
the  water.  Yet  in  that  dreadful  moment  his  self-possession  never 
failed  him.  He  uttered  in  loud  and  solemn  tones  a  prayer  to  God. 
He  addressed  those  who  were  nearest  him  with  all  the  skill  that 
a  consummate  knowledge  of  the  popular  character  could  supply, 
and  he  speedily  won  over  to  his  side  some  of  the  most  powerful  of 
the  leaders.  Gradually  the  throng  paused,  wavered,  divided; 
and  Wesley  returned  almost  uninjured  to  his  house.  To  a  similar 
courage  he  owed  his  life  at  Bolton,  when  the  house  where  he  was 


486  English  Historians 

preaching  was  attacked,  and  at  last  burst  open,  by  a  furious  crowd 
thirsting  for  his  life.  Again  a,nd  again  he  preached,  like  the  other 
leaders  of  the  movement,  in  the  midst  of  showers  of  stones  or  tiles 
or  rotten  eggs.  The  fortunes  of  his  brother  were  little  different. 
At  Cardiff,  when  he  was  preaching,  women  were  kicked  and  their 
clothes  set  on  fire  by  fire-works.  At  St.  Ives  and  in  the  neighbor- 
ing villages  the  congregations  were  attacked  with  cudgels,  and 
everything  in  the  room  where  they  were  assembled  was  shattered  to 
atoms.  At  Devizes  a  water  engine  played  upon  the  house  where 
he  was  staying.  His  horses  were  seized.  The  house  of  one  of  his 
supporters  was  ransacked,  and  bull  dogs  were  let  loose  upon  him. 
At  Dublin  Whitefield  was  almost  stoned  to  death.  At  Exeter 
he  was  stoned  in  the  very  presence  of  the  bishop.  At  Plymouth 
he  was  violently  assaulted  and  his  life  seriously  threatened  by  a 
naval  officer.  .  .  . 

§  5.   Methodism  and  Worldly  Things 

In  the  intense  religious  enthusiasm  that  was  generated,  many  of 
the  ties  of  life  were  snapped  in  twain.  Children  treated  with  con- 
tempt the  commands  of  their  parents,  students  the  rules  of  their 
colleges,  clergymen  the  discipline  of  their  Church.  The  whole 
structure  of  society,  and  almost  all  the  amusements  of  life,  appeared 
criminal.  The  fairs,  the  mountebanks,  the  public  rejoicings  of 
the  people,  were  all  Satanic.  It  was  sinful  for  a  woman  to  wear 
any  gold  ornament  or  any  brilliant  dress.  It  was  even  sinful  for 
a  man  to  exercise  the  common  prudence  of  laying  by  a  certain 
portion  of  his  income.  When  Whitefield  proposed  to  a  lady  to 
marry  him,  he  thought  it  necessary  to  say,  "I  bless  God,  if  I  know 
anything  of  my  own  heart,  I  am  free  from  that  foolish  passion 
which  the  world  calls  love.  I  trust  I  love  you  only  for  God,  and 
desire  to  be  joined  to  you  only  by  His  commands,  and  for  His  sake." 
It  is  perhaps  not  very  surprising  that  Whitefield's  marriage,  like 
that  of  Wesley,  proved  very  unhappy.  Theatres  and  the  reading 
of  plays  were  absolutely  condemned,  and  Methodists  employed 
all  their  influence  with  the  authorities  to  prevent  the  erection  of 
the  former.  It  seems  to  have  been  regarded  as  a  divine  judgment 
that  once,  when  Macbeth  was  being  acted  at  Drury  Lane,  a  real 
thunderstorm  mingled  with  the  mimic  thunder  in  the  witch  scene. 
Dancing  was,  if  possible,  even  worse  than  the  theatre.  "  Dancers," 
said  Whitefield,  "please  the  devil  at  every  step,"  and  it  was  said 
that  his  visit  to  a  town  usually  put  "a  stop  to  the  dancing-school, 


John  Wesley  and  Methodism  487 

the  assemblies,  and  every  pleasant  thing."  He  made  it  his  mis- 
sion to  "bear  testimony  against  the  detestable  diversions  of  this 
generation,"  and  he  declared  that  no  "recreations,  considered  as 
such,  can  be  innocent."  A  poor  Kingswood  collier  was  noted 
for  his  skill  in  playing  the  violin.  He  passed  under  Methodist 
influence,  and  at  once  consigned  his  instrument  to  the  flames. 
Wesley  was  a  man  of  powerful  intellect  and  cultivated  taste,  yet 
we  find  him  objecting  to  the  statues  at  Stourton,  among  other 
reasons,  "because  I  cannot  admire  the  images  of  devils;  and  we 
know  the  gods  of  the  heathens  are  but  devils,"  and  his  only  com- 
ment upon  the  treasures  of  art  and  nature  recently  amassed  in 
the  British  Museum  was  "What  account  will  a  man  give  to  the 
Judge  of  quick- and  dead  for  a  life  spent  in  collecting  all  these?" 
But  perhaps  the  most  striking  illustration  of  this  side  of  Metho- 
dist teaching  is  furnished  by  the  rules  he  drew  up  for  the  school 
which  he  founded  at  Kingswood.  The  little  children  rose  every 
morning,  winter  and  summer,  at  four,  and  were  directed  in  the 
first  place  to  spend  nearly  an  hour  in  private  devotions.  "As 
we  have  no  playdays,"  he  adds,  "the  school  being  taught  every 
day  in  the  year  but  Sunday,  so  neither  do  we  allow  any  time  for 
play  on  any  day;  he  that  plays  when  he  is  a  child  will  play  when 
he  is  a  man."  .  .  . 

§  6.   Wesley  and  Supernaturalism 

In  all  matters  relating  to  Satanic  interference,  Wesley  was  es- 
pecial'y  credulous.  The  abolition  of  the  laws  against  witchcraft, 
which  closed  the  fountain  of  an  incalculable  amount  of  undeserved 
suffering,  would  probably  not  have  taken  place  without  a  violent 
struggle  if  the  Methodist  movement  had  had  an  earlier  develop- 
ment. Wesley  again  and  again  reiterated,  with  the  utmost  em- 
phasis, his  belief  in  witchcraft,  and  again  and  again  attributed  its 
downfall  to  religious  scepticism.  "It  is  true  likewise,"  he  wrote, 
"that  the  English  in  general,  and  indeed  most  of  the  men  of  learn- 
ing in  Europe,  have  given  up  all  accounts  of  witches  and  appari- 
tions as  mere  old  wives'  fables.  I  am  sorry  for  it,  and  I  willingly 
take  this  opportunity  of  entering  my  solemn  protest  against  this 
violent  compliment  which  so  many  that  believe  the  Bible  pay  to 
those  who  do  not  believe  it.  I  owe  them  no  such  service.  I  take 
knowledge  that  these  are  at  the  bottom  of  the  outcry  which  has 
been  raised,  and  with  such  insolence  spread  throughout  the  nation, 
in  direct  opposition  not  only  to  the  Bible,  but  to  the  suffrages  of 


488  English  Historians 

the  wisest  and  best  men  of  all  ages  and  nations.  They  well  know 
(whether  Christians  know  it  or  not)  that  the  giving  up  witchcraft 
is  in  effect  giving  up  the  Bible.  I  cannot  give  up  to  all  the 
Deists  in  Great  Britain  the  existence  of  witchcraft  till  I  give  up 
the  credit  of  all  history,  sacred  and  profane."  He  had  no  doubt 
that  the  physical  contortions  into  which  so  many  of  his  hearers  fell 
were  due  to  the  direct  agency  of  Satan,  who  tore  the  converts  as 
they  were  coming  to  Christ.  He  had  himself  seen  men  and  women 
who  were  literally  possessed  by  devils ;  he  had  witnessed  forms  of 
madness  which  were  not  natural,  but  diabolical,  and  he  had  ex- 
perienced in  his  own  person  the  hysterical  affections  which  resulted 
from  supernatural  agency. 

On  the  other  hand,  if  Satanic  agencies  continually  convulsed 
those  who  were  coming  to  the  faith,  divine  judgments  as  frequently 
struck  down  those  who  opposed  it.  Every  illness,  every  misfor- 
tune that  befell  an  opponent  was  believed  to  be  supernatural. 
Molther,  the  Moravian  minister  shortly  after  the  Methodists  had 
separated  from  the  Moravians,  was  seized  with  a  passing  illness. 
"I  believe,"  wrote  Wesley,  "it  was  the  hand  of  God  that  was  upon 
him."  Numerous  cases  were  cited  of  sudden  and  fearful  judg- 
ments which  fell  upon  the  adversaries  of  the  cause.  A  clergyman 
at  Bristol,  standing  up  to  preach  against  the  Methodists,  "was 
suddenly  seized  with  a  rattling  in  his  throat,  attended  with  a  hide- 
ous groaning,"  and  on  the  next  Sunday  he  died.  At  Todmorden 
a  minister  was  struck  with  a  violent  fit  of  palsy  immediately  after 
preaching  against  the  Methodists.  At  Enniscorthy  a  clergyman, 
having  preached  for  some  time  against  the  Methodists,  deferred  the 
conclusion  of  his  discourse  to  the  following  Sunday.  Next  morn- 
ing he  was  raging  mad,  imagined  that  devils  were  about  him,  "and 
not  long  after,  without  showing  the  least  sign  of  hope,  he  went  to 
his  account."  At  Kingswood  a  man  began  a  vehement  invective 
against  Wesley  and  Methodism.  "In  the  midst  he  was  struck 
raving  mad."  A  woman,  seeing  a  crowd  waiting  for  Wesley  at 
a  church  door,  exclaimed,  "They  are  waiting  for  their  God." 
She  at  once  fell  senseless  to  the  ground  and  next  day  expired.  "A 
party  of  young  men  rowed  up  to  Richmond  to  disturb  the  sermons 
of  Rowland  Hill.  The  boat  sank  and  all  of  them  were  drowned." 
At  Sheffield  the  captain  of  a  gang  who  had  long  troubled  the  field 
preachers  was  bathing  with  his  companions.  "Another  dip," 
he  said,  "and  then  for  a  bit  of  sport  with  the  Methodists."  He 
dived,  struck  his  head  against  a  stone,  and  appeared  no  more.  .  .  . 


John  Wesley  and  Methodism  489 


§  7.   Wesley  as  a  Man 

Few  things  in  ecclesiastical  history  are  more  striking  than  the 
energy  and  the  success  with  which  John  Wesley  propagated  his 
opinions.  He  was  gifted  with  a  frame  of  iron  and  with  spirits 
that  never  flagged.  "I  do  not  remember,"  he  wrote,  when  an 
old  man,  "to  have  felt  lowness  of  spirits  for  a  quarter  of  an  hour 
since  I  was  born."  He  was  accustomed  to  attribute,  probably 
with  much  reason,  to  his  perpetual  journeys  on  horseback,  the 
almost  superhuman  flow  of  health  and  vigor  which  he  enjoyed. 
He  lived  eighty-seven  years,  and  continued  his  efforts  to  the  very 
close.  He  rose  long  before  daybreak.  He  preached  usually  at  five 
o'clock  in  the  morning.  When  he  was  eighty-five  he  once  de- 
livered more  than  eighty  sermons  in  eight  weeks.  In  the  very  last 
year  of  his  life  he  went  on  a  missionary  journey  to  Scotland,  and 
on  one  occasion  travelled  seventy  miles  in  a  single  day.  During 
the  greater  part  of  his  career,  he  was  accustomed  to  preach  about 
800  sermons  a  year,  and  it  was  computed  that  in  the  fifty  years  of 
his  itinerant  life  he  travelled  a  quarter  of  a  million  of  miles,  and 
preached  more  than  40,000  sermons.  Like  Whitefield,  he  had  the 
power  of  riveting  the  attention  of  audiences  of  8000,  10,000,  and 
sometimes  even  20,000  souls,  and,  like  Whitefield,  a  great  part  of 
his  success  depended  on  the  topics  he  habitually  employed ;  but 
in  other  respects  his  sermons  bore  no  resemblance  to  the  impas- 
sioned harangues  of  his  great  colleague.  His  style  was  simple, 
terse,  colloquial,  abounding  in  homely  images,  characterized  above 
all  things  by  its  extreme  directness,  by  the  manifest  and  complete 
subordination  of  all  other  considerations  to  the  one  great  end  of 
impressing  his  doctrines  on  his  hearers,  animated  by  a  tone  of 
intense  and  penetrating  sincerity  that  found  its  way  to  the  hearts 
of  thousands.  He  possessed  to  the  highest  degree  that  controlled 
and  reasoning  fanaticism  which  is  one  of  the  most  powerful  agents 
in  moving  the  passions  of  men.  While  preaching  doctrines  of 
the  wildest  extravagance,  while  representing  himself  as  literally 
inspired,  and  his  hearers  as  surrounded  by  perpetual  miracles,  his 
manner  and  his  language  were  always  those  of  a  scholar  and  a  gen- 
tleman, —  calm,  deliberate,  and  self-possessed.  He  was  always 
dressed  with  a  scrupulous  neatness.  His  countenance,  to  the  very 
close  of  his  life,  was  singularly  beautiful  and  expressive,  and  in 
his  old  age  his  long  white  hair  added  a  peculiar  venerableness  to 
his  appearance.  Great  natural  knowledge  of  men,  improved  by 


490  English  Historians 

extraordinary  experience,  gave  him  an  almost  unrivalled  skill  in 
dealing  with  the  most  various  audiences,  and  the  courage  with 
which  he  never  failed  to  encounter  angry  mobs,  as  well  as  the  quiet 
dignity  of  manner  which  never  forsook  him,  added  greatly  to  the 
effects  of  his  preaching. 

His  administrative  powers  were  probably  still  greater  than  his 
power  as  a  preacher.  Few  tasks  are  more  difficult  than  the  organi- 
zation into  a  permanent  body  of  half-educated  men,  intoxicated 
with  the  wildest  religious  enthusiasm,  believing  themselves  to  be 
all  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  holding  opinions  that  run 
perilously  near  the  abyss  of  Antinomianism.  Wesley  accomplished 
the  task  with  an  admirable  mixture  of  tact,  firmness,  and  gentle- 
ness, and  the  skill  with  which  he  framed  the  Methodist  organiza- 
tion is  sufficiently  shown  by  its  later  history.  Like  all  men  with 
extraordinary  administrative  gifts,  he  had  a  great  love  of  power, 
and  this  fact  renders  peculiarly  honorable  his  evident  reluctance 
to  detach  himself  from  the  discipline  of  his  Church. 

He  has,  it  is  true,  no  title  to  be  regarded  as  a  great  thinker.     His 
mind  had  not  much  originality  or  speculative  power,  and  his 
leading  tenets  placed  him  completely  out  of  harmony  with  the 
higher  intellect  of  his  time.     Holding  the  doctrine  of  a  particular 
Providence  in  such  a  sense  as  to  believe  that  the  physical  phenom- 
ena of  the  universe  were  constantly  changed  for  human  convenience 
and  at  human  prayers,  he  could  have  little  sympathy  with  scien- 
tific thought.     Assuming  as  axioms  the  inspiration  of  every  won1 
of  the  Bible  and  his  own  inspiration  in  interpreting  it,  throwing  M« 
whole  weight  of  religious  proof  upon  what  he  termed  "  a  new  class  «.»• 
senses  opened  in  the  soul  to  be  the  avenues  of  the  invisible  world, 
the  evidence  of  things  not  seen,  as  the  bodily  senses  are  of  visibl* 
things,"  he  was  simply  indifferent  to  the  gravest  historical,  crii, 
cal,  and  ethical  questions  that  were  discussed  about  him,  and  difii 
culties  that  troubled  some  of  the  greatest  thinkers  were  imperce; 
tible  for  him.     No  class  of  opinions  are  less  likely  to  commen; 
themselves  to  a  judicial  and  critical  intellect  than  those  which  he 
embraced.     His  mind  was  incapable  of  continued  doubt.     His 
credulity  and  confidence  on  some  subjects  were  unbounded,  an*, 
his  judgments  of  men  were  naturally  strongly  biassed  by  his  thec 
logical  views.     Thus  Hume  appeared  to  him  merely  as  "the  most 
insolent  despiser  of  truth  and  virtue  that  ever  appeared  in  the 
world,"  and  he  regarded  Beattie  as  incomparably  superior  both 
as  a  writer  and  a  reasoner.     Leibnitz  he  pronounced  to  be  one  of 
the  poorest  writers  he  had  ever  read.     He  could  not  pardon  Reid 


John  Wesley  and   Methodism  491 

for  having  spoken  respectfully  of  Rousseau,  or  Robertson  for 
having  referred  without  censure  to  Lord  Kames,  or  Smollett  and 
Guthrie  for  having  treated  witchcraft  as  a  superstition.  Still 
even  the  literary  side  of  his  character  is  by  no  means  contemptible. 
He  was  an  indefatigable  and  very  skilful  controversialist,  a  volumi- 
nous writer,  and  a  still  more  voluminous  editor.  His  writings, 
though  they  are  certainly  not  distinguished  either  by  originality 
of  thought  or  by  eloquence  of  expression,  are  always  terse,  well 
reasoned,  full  of  matter  and  meaning.  Unlike  a  large  proportion 
of  his  followers,  he  had  no  contempt  for  human  learning,  and  in 
spite  of  the  incessant  activity  of  his  career  he  found  time  for  much 
and  various  reading.  He  was  accustomed  to  read  history,  poetry, 
and  philosophy  on  horseback,  and  one  of  the  charms  of  his  jour- 
nals is  the  large  amount  of  shrewd  literary  criticism  they  contain. 
His  many-sided  activity  was  displayed  in  the  most  various  fields, 
and  his  keen  eye  was  open  to  every  form  of  abuse.  At  one  time 
we  find  him  lamenting  the  glaring  inequalities  of  political  represen- 
tation ;  that  Old  Sarum  without  house  or  inhabitant  should  send 
two  members  to  Parliament;  that  Looe,  "a  town  nearly  half  as 
large  as  Islington,"  should  send  four  members,  while  every  county 
in  North  Wales  sent  only  one.  At  another  he  dilated  on  the  costly 
diffusiveness  of  English  legal  documents,  or  on  the  charlatanry 
and  inconsistency  of  English  medicine.  He  set  up  a  dispensary, 
ajid,  though  not  a  qualified  practitioner,  he  gratuitously  admin- 
istered medicine  to  the  poor.  He  was  a  strong  advocate  of  inocu- 
sdtion,  which  was  then  coming  into  use,  and  of  the  application  of 
Itiectr'city  to  medicine,  and  he  attempted,  partly  on  sanitary 
,fcjnd  partly  on  economical  grounds,  to  discourage  the  use  of  tea 
^ftiong  the  poor.  He  was  among  the  first  to  reprobate  the  horrors 
-if  the  slave  trade,  to  call  attention  to  the  scandalous  condition  of 
-%he  jails,  to  make  collections  for  relieving  the  miserable  destitu- 
-^on  of  the  French  prisoners  of  war.  He  supported  with  the  whole 
[weight  of  his  influence  the  Sunday-school  movement.  He  made 
^praiseworthy  efforts  to  put  down  among  his  followers  that  political 
Corruption  which  was  perhaps  the  most  growing  vice  of  English 
^society.  He  also  took  an  active,  though  a  very  unfortunate  part 
-';ti  some  of  the  political  questions  of  the  day.  He  wrote  against 
4he  concession  of  relief  to  the  Catholics;  and  during  the  American 
struggle  he  threw  into  a  more  popular  form  the  chief  arguments 
in  Dr.  Johnson's  pamphlet  against  the  Americans,  and  had  prob- 
ably a  considerable  influence  in  forming  the  public  opinion  hostile 
to  all  concession 


CHAPTER  m 

PERSONAL  GOVERNMENT  OF   GEORGE  HI 

DURING  the  early  years  of  his  reign,  George  III  demonstrated 
clearly  the  immense  power  which  the  crown  could  still  wield  in 
government  by  means  of  personal  influence,  bribery,  appoint- 
ments to  government  positions,  and  elevation  to  the  peerage.  He 
resented  control  by  ministers  depending  for  their  authority  upon 
the  House  of  Commons,  he  narrowly  watched  the  conduct  of 
debates  in  the  Parliament,  and  though  compelled  for  a  time  to 
accept  ministers  whom  he  disliked,  he  steadily  worked  to  increase 
his  control  in  Commons  by  methods  which  May  describes  in  an 
interesting  fashion  in  the  first  volume  of  his  Constitutional  History 
of  England. 

§  i.    The  King's  Friends  and  Royal  Intervention  in  Parliamen- 
tary Affairs  l 

The  king's  friends  became  more  numerous  and  acted  under 
better  discipline.  Some  held  offices  in  the  government  or  house- 
hold, yet  looked  for  instructions,  not  to  ministers,  but  to  the  king. 
Men  enjoying  obscure,  but  lucrative  appointments,  in  the  gift  of 
the  king  himself  and  other  members  of  the  royal  family,  voted  at 
the  bidding  of  the  court.  But  the  greater  number  of  the  king's 
friends  were  independent  members  of  Parliament,  whom  various 
motives  had  attracted  to  his  cause.  Many  were  influenced  by 
high  notions  of  prerogative,  —  by  loyalty,  by  confidence  in  the  judg- 
ment and  honesty  of  their  sovereign,  and  personal  attachment 
to  his  Majesty,  and  many  by  hopes  of  favor  and  advancement. 
They  formed  a  distinct  party,  and  their  coherence  was  secured 
by  the  same  causes  which  generally  contribute  to  the  formation 

1  May,  Constitutional  History  of  England,  Vol.  I,  pp.  35  ff.  By  per- 
mission of  Longmans,  Green,  &  Company,  Publishers. 

492 


Personal  Government  of  George  III         493 

of"  party  ties.  But  their  principles  and  position  were  inconsistent 
with  constitutional  government.  Their  services  to  the  king  were 
no  longer  confined  to  counsel  or  political  intrigue;  but  were  or- 
ganized so  as  to  influence  the  deliberations  of  Parliament.  And 
their  organization  for  such  a  purpose  marked  a  further  advance  in 
the  unconstitutional  policy  of  the  court. 

The  king  continued  personally  to  direct  the  measures  of  his 
ministers,  more  particularly  in  the  disputes  with  the  American 
colonies,  which,  in  his  opinion,  involved  the  rights  and  honor 
of  his  crown.  He  was  resolutely  opposed  to  the  repeal  of  the 
Stamp  Act,  which  ministers  thought  necessary  for  the  conciliation 
of  the  colonies.  He  resisted  this  measure  in  council ;  but  finding 
ministers  resolved  to  carry  it,  he  opposed  them  in  Parliament  by 
the  authority  of  his  name,  and  by  his  personal  influence  over  a  con- 
siderable body  of  Parliamentary  adherents.  The  king  affected, 
indeed,  to  support  his  ministers,  and  to  decline  the  use  of  his  name 
in  opposing  them.  "Lord  Harcourt  suggested,  at  a  distance,  that 
his  Majesty  might  make  his  sentiments  known,  which  might  pre- 
vent the  repeal  of  the  act,  if  his  ministers  should  push  that  measure. 
The  king  seemed  averse  to  that,  said  he  would  never  influence 
people  in  their  Parliamentary  opinions,  and  that  he  had  promised 
to  support  his  ministers."  But  however  the  king  may  have  affected 
to  deprecate  the  use  of  his  name,  it  was  unquestionably  used  by 
his  friends,  and  while  he  himself  admitted  the  unconstitutional 
character  of  such  a  proceeding,  it  found  a  defender  in  Lord 
Mansfield.  In  discussing  this  matter  with,  the  king,  his  lordship 
argued  "that,  though  it  would  be  unconstitutional,  to  endeavor 
by  his  Majesty's  name  to  carry  questions  in  Parliament,  yet  where 
the  lawful  rights  of  the  king  and  Parliament  were  to  be  asserted 
and  maintained,  he  thought  the  making  his  Majesty's  opinion  in 
support  of  those  rights  to  be  known,  was  fit  and  becoming."  In 
order  to  counteract  this  secret  influence,  Lord  Rockingham  ob- 
tained the  king's  written  consent  to  the  passing  of  the  bill. 

Ministers  had  to  contend  against  another  difficulty,  which  the 
tactics  of  the  court  had  created.  Not  only  were  they  opposed  by 
independent  members  of  the  court  party,  but  members  holding 
office — upon  whose  support  ministers  were  justified  in  relying — 
were  encouraged  to  oppose  them,  and  retained  their  offices  while 
voting  in  the  ranks  of  the  opposition.  The  king,  who  had  punished 
with  so  much  severity  any  opposition  to  measures  which  he  ap- 
proved, now  upheld  and  protected  those  placemen,  who  opposed 
the  ministerial  measures  to  which  he  himself  objected.  In  vain 


494  English  Historians 

ministers  remonstrated  against  their  conduct,  the  king  was  ready 
with  excuses  and  promises,  but  his  chosen  band  were  safe  from  the 
indignation  of  the  government.  Nor  was  their  opposition  confined 
to  the  repeal  of  the  Stamp  Act, — a  subject  on  which  they  might 
have  affected  to  entertain  conscientious  scruples ;  but  it  was  vexa- 
tiously  continued  against  the  general  measures  of  the  adminis- 
tration. Well  might  Mr.  Burke  term  this  "an  opposition  of  a 
new  and  singular  character,  —  an  opposition  of  placemen  and 
pensioners."  .  .  . 

The  king,  meanwhile,  had  resolved  to  overthrow  the  Rocking- 
ham  ministry,  which  was  on  every  account  distasteful  to  him.  He 
disapproved  their  liberal  policy;  he  was  jealous  of  their  powerful 
party,  which  he  was  bent  on  breaking  up;  and,  above  all,  he 
resented  their  independence.  He  desired  ministers  to  execute  his 
will,  and  these  men  and  their  party  were  the  obstacles  to  the 
cherished  object  of  his  ambition. 

§  2.   Chatham  and  Parly  Government 

At  length,  in  July,  1766,  they  were  ungraciously  dismissed;  and 
his  Majesty  now  expected,  from  the  hands  of  Mr.  Pitt,  an  admin- 
istration better  suited  to  his  own  views  and  policy.  Mr.  Pitt's 
greatness  had  naturally  pointed  him  out  as  the  fittest  man  for  such 
a  task ;  and  there  were  other  circumstances  which  made  him  per- 
sonally acceptable  to  the  king.  Haughty  as  was  the  demeanor  of 
that  distinguished  man'  in  the  senate,  and  among  his  equals,  his 
bearing  in  the  royal  presence  was  humble  and  obsequious.  The 
truth  of  Mr.  Burke's  well-known  sarcasm,  that  "the  least  peep 
into  that  closet  intoxicates  him,  and  will  to  the  end  of  his  life," 
was  recognized  by  all  his  contemporaries.  A  statesman  with  at 
least  the  outward  qualities  of  a  courtier,  was  likely  to  give  the 
king  some  repose,  after  his  collisions  with  the  last  two  ministries. 
He  now  undertook  to  form  an  administration,  under  the  Duke  of 
Grafton,  with  the  office  of  privy  seal,  and  a  seat  in  the  Upper 
House,  as  Earl  of  Chatham. 

For  another  reason  also,  Lord  Chatham  was  acceptable  to  the 
king.  They  agreed,  though  for  different  reasons,  in  the  policy  of 
breaking  up  party  connections.  This  was  now  the  settled  object 
of  the  king,  which  he  pursued  with  unceasing  earnestness.  In 
writing  to  Lord  Chatham,  July  29,  1766,  he  said,  "I  know  the 
Earl  of  Chatham  will  zealously  give  his  aid  toward  destroying  all 
party  distinctions,  and  restoring  that  subordination  to  government 


Personal  Government  of  George  III         495 

which  can  alone  preserve  that  inestimable  blessing,  liberty,  from 
degenerating  into  licentiousness."  Again,  December  2,  1766,  he 
wrote  to  the  Earl  of  Chatham,  "To  rout  out  the  present  method  of 
parties  banding  together  can  only  be  obtained  by  withstanding 
their  unjust  demands,  as  well  as  the  engaging  able  men,  be  their 
private  connections  where  they  will."  And  again,  on  the  25th  of 
June,  1767,  "I  am  thoroughly  resolved  to  encounter  any  difficul- 
ties rather  than  yield  to  faction." 

By  this  policy  the  king  hoped  to  further  his  cherished  scheme 
of  increasing  his  own  personal  influence.  To  overcome  the  Whig 
connection  was  to  bring  into  office  the  friends  of  Lord  Bute  and 
the  court  party  who  were  subservient  to  his  views.  Lord  Chat- 
ham adopted  the  king's  policy  for  a  very  different  purpose.  Though 
in  outward  observances  a  courtier,  he  was  a  constitutional  states- 
man, opposed  to  government  by  prerogative  and  court  influence. 
His  career  had  been  due  to  his  own  genius,  independent  of  party, 
and  superior  to  it ;  he  had  trusted  to  his  eloquence,  his  statesman- 
ship, and  popularity.  And  now,  by  breaking  up  parties,  he  hoped 
to  rule  over  them  all.  His  project,  however,  completely  failed. 
Having  offended  and  exasperated  the  Whigs,  he  found  himself 
at  the  head  of  an  administration  composed  of  the  king's  friends, 
who  thwarted  him,  and  of  other  discordant  elements,  over  which 
he  had  no  control. 

He  discovered,  when  it  was  too  late,  that  the  king  had  been  more 
sagacious  than  himself,  and  that  while  his  own  power  and  con- 
nections had  crumbled  away,  the  court  party  had  obtained  a  dan- 
gerous ascendency.  Parties  had  been  broken  up,  and  prerogative 
triumpned.  The  leaders  of  parties  had  been  reduced  to  insignifi- 
cance, while  the  king  directed  public  affairs  according  to  his  own 
will  and  upon  principles  dangerous  to  public  liberty.  According 
to  Burke,  when  Lord  Chatham  "had  accomplished  his  scheme  of 
administration,  he  was  no  longer  minister." 

Meanwhile,  other  circumstances  contributed  to  increase  the  in- 
fluence of  the  king.  Much  of  Lord  Chatham's  popularity  had 
been  sacrificed  by  the  acceptance  of  a  peerage,  and  his  personal 
influence  was  diminished  by  his  removal  from  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, where  he  had  been  paramount.  His  holding  so  obscure  a 
place  as  that  of  privy  seal  further  detracted  from  his  weight  as  a 
minister.  His  melancholy  prostration  soon  afterward  increased 
the  feebleness  and  disunion  of  the  administration.  Though  his 
was  its  leading  mind,  for  months  he  was  incapacitated  from  attend- 
ing to  any  business.  He  even  refused  an  interview  to  the  Duke  of 


496  English  Historians 

Graf  ton,  the  premier,  and  to  General  Con  way,  though  commis- 
sioned by  the  king  to  confer  with  him.  It  is  not  surprising  that 
the  Duke  of  Grafton  should  complain  of  the  languor  under  which 
"every  branch  of  the  administration  labored  from  his  absence." 
Yet  the  king,  writing  to  Lord  Chatham,  January  23,  1768,  to  dis- 
suade him  from  resigning  the  privy  seal,  said,  "Though  confined 
to  your  house,  your  name  has  been  sufficient  to  enable  my  ad- 
ministration to  proceed."  At  length,  however,  in  October,  1768, 
completely  broken  down,  he  resigned  his  office,  and  withdrew  from 
the  administration. 

§  3.    The  Accession  of  Lord  North  and  Royal  Intervention 

The  absence  of  Lord  Chatham,  and  the  utter  disorganization  of 
the  ministry,  left  the  king  free  to  exercise  his  own  influence,  and 
to  direct  the  policy  of  the  country  without  control.  Had  Lord 
Chatham  been  there,  the  ministry  would  have  had  a  policy  of  its 
own ;  now  it  had  none,  and  the  Duke  of  Grafton  and  Lord  North 
—  partly  from  indolence  and  partly  from  facility  —  consented  to 
follow  the  stronger  will  of  their  sovereign. 

On  his  side,  the  king  took  advantage  of  the  disruption  of  party 
ties,  which  he  had  taken  pains  to  promote.  In  the  absence  of 
distinctive  principles  and  party  leaders,  members  of  Parliament 
were  exposed  to  the  direct  influence  of  the  crown.  According  to 
Horace  Walpole,  "everybody  ran  to  court,  and  voted  for  what- 
ever the  court  desired."  The  main  object  of  the  king  in  breaking 
up  parties  had  thus  been  secured. 

On  the  resignation  of  the  Duke  of  Grafton,  the  king's  ascendency 
in  the  council  of  his  ministers  was  further  increased  by  the  accession 
of  Lord  North  to  the  chief  direction  of  public  affairs.  That  min- 
ister, by  principle  a  Tory  and  favorable  to  prerogative  —  in  char- 
acter indolent  and  good-tempered, — and  personally  attached  to  the 
king  —  yielded  up  his  own  opinions  and  judgment,  and  for  years 
consented  to  be  the  passive  instrument  of  the  royal  will.  The 
persecution  of  VVilkes,  the  straining  of  Parliamentary  privilege, 
and  the  coercion  of  America,  were  the  disastrous  fruits  of  the  court 
policy.  Throughout  this  administration,  the  king  staked  his  per- 
sonal credit  upon  the  success  of  his  measures,  and  regarded  oppo- 
sition to  his  minister  as  an  act  of  disloyalty,  and  their  defeat  as  an 
affront  to  himself. 

In  1770  Lord  Chatham  stated  in  Parliament,  that  since  the  king's 
accession  there  had  been  no  original  (i.e.  independent)  minister, 


Personal  Government  of  George  III         497 

and  examples  abound  of  the  king's  personal  participation  in  every 
political  event  of  this  period. 

While  the  opposition  were  struggling  to  reverse  the  proceedings 
of  the  House  of  Commons  against  Wilkes,  and  Lord  Chatham 
was  about  to  move  an  address  for  dissolving  Parliament,  the  king's 
resentment  knew  no  bounds.  In  conversations  with  General 
Conway,  at  this  time,  he  declared  he  would  abdicate  his  crown 
rather  than  comply  with  this  address.  "Yes,"  said  the  king, 
laying  his  hand  on  his  sword,  "I  will  have  recourse  to  this,  sooner 
than  yield  to  a  dissolution  of  Parliament."  And  opinions  have  not 
been  wanting  that  the  king  was  actually  prepared  to  resist  what  he 
deemed  an  invasion  of  his  prerogative  by  military  force. 

On  the  a6th  February,  1772,  while  the  Royal  Marriage  Bill  was 
pending  in  the  House  of  Lords,  the  king  thus  wrote  to  Lord  North : 
"I  expect  every  nerve  to  be  strained  to  carry  the  bill.  It  is  not 
a  question  relating  to  administration,  but  personally  to  myself; 
therefore  I  have  a  right  to  expect  a  hearty  support  from  every  one 
in  my  service,  and  I  shall  remember  defaulters."  Again,  on  the 
i4th  March,  1772, he  wrote :  "I  wishalist  could  be  prepared  of  those 
that  went  away,  and  of  those  that  deserted  to  the  minority  (on 
division  in  the  committee).  That  would  be  a  rule  for  my  conduct 
in  the  drawing-room  to-morrow."  Again,  in  another  letter,  he 
said:  "I  am  greatly  incensed  at  the  presumption  of  Charles  Fox, 
in  forcing  you  to  vote  with  him  last  night.  ...  I  hope  you  will 
let  him  know  that  you  are  not  insensible  of  his  conduct  toward 
you."  And  the  king's  confidence  in  his  own  influence  over  the 
deliberations  of  Parliament  appears  from  another  letter,  on  the 
26th  June,  1774,  where  he  said,  "I  hope  the  crown  will  always  be 
able,  in  either  house  of  Parliament,  to  throw  out  a  bill,  but  I  shall 
never  consent  to  use  any  expression  which  tends  to  establish,  that 
at  no  time  the  right  of  the  crown  to  dissent  is  to  be  used." 

The  king  watched  not  only  how  members  spoke  and  voted,  or 
whether  they  abstained  from  voting ;  but  even  if  they  were  silent, 
when  he  had  expected  them  to  speak.  No  "whipper-in"  from  the 
Treasury  could  have  been  more  keen  or  full  of  expedients  in 
influencing  the  votes  of  members  in  critical  divisions.  He  was 
ready,  also,  to  take  advantage  of  the  absence  of  opponents.  Hear- 
ing that  Mr.  Fox  was  going  to  Paris,  he  wrote  to  Lord  North,  on 
the  1 5th  November,  1776,  "Bring  as  much  forward  as  you  can 
before  the  recess,  as  real  business  is  never  so  well  considered  as 
when  the  attention  of  the  House  is  not  taken  up  with  noisy 
declamation."  .  .  . 

2K 


498  English  Historians 


§  4.  Failure  of  Personal  Government 

Not  without  many  affronts,  and  much  unpopularity,  the  king 
and  his  minister  long  triumphed  over  all  opposition  in  Parlia- 
ment, but  in  1778  the  signal  failure  of  their  policy,  the  crisis  in 
American  affairs,  and  the  impending  war  with  France  obliged 
them  to  enter  into  negotiations  with  Lord  Chatham  for  the  ad- 
mission of  that  statesman  and  some  of  the  leaders  of  the  opposition 
into  the  ministry.  The  king  needed  their  assistance,  but  was 
resolved  not  to  adopt  their  policy.  He  would  accept  them  as 
instruments  of  his  own  will  but  not  as  responsible  ministers.  If 
their  counsels  should  prevail,  he  would  himself  be  humiliated  and 
disgraced. 

In  a  letter  to  Lord  North,  on  the  isth  March,  1778,  the  king 
says,  "Honestly,  I  would  rather  lose  the  crown  I  now  wear  than 
bear  the  ignominy  of  possessing  it  under  their  shackles."  And, 
again,  on  the  i7th  March,  he  writes:  "I  am  still  ready  to  accept 
any  part  of  them  that  will  come  to  the  assistance  of  my  present 
efficient  ministers ;  but,  whilst  any  ten  men  in  the  kingdom  will 
stand  by  me  I  will  not  give  myself  up  to  bondage.  My  dear 
Lord,  I  will  rather  risk  my  crown  than  do  what  I  think  personally 
disgraceful.  It  is  impossible  this  nation  should  not  stand  by  me. 
If  they  will  not,  they  shall  have  another  king,  for  I  never  will  put 
my  hand  to  what  will  make  me  miserable  to  the  last  hour  of  my 
life."  Again,  on  the  i8th,  he  writes,  "Rather  than  be  shackled 
by  those  desperate  men  (if  the  nation  will  not  stand  by  me),  I 
will  rather  see  any  form  of  government  introduced  into  this  island, 
and  lose  my  crown,  rather  than  wear  it  as  a  disgrace."  The  fail- 
ure of  these  negotiations,  followed  by  the  death  of  Lord  Chatham, 
left  unchanged  the  unfortunate  administration  of  Lord  North. 

Overtures,  indeed,  were  made  to  the  Whig  leaders,  to  join  a  new 
ministry  under  Lord  Weymouth,  which  were,  perhaps  unwisely, 
declined,  and  henceforth  the  king  was  resolved  to  admit  none  to 
his  councils  without  exacting  a  pledge  of  compliance  with  his 
wishes.  Thus,  on  the  4th  February,  r  779,  writing  to  Lord  North,  he 
says,  "You  may  now  sound  Lord  Howe;  but,  before  I  name  him 
to  preside  at  the  Admiralty  Board,  I  must  expect  an  explicit  deck- 
ration  that  he  will  zealously  concur  in  prosecuting  the  war  in  all 
the  quarters  of  the  globe."  Again,  on  the  22nd  June,  1779,  he 
writes,  "Before  I  will  hear  of  any  man's  readiness  to  come  into 
office,  I  will  expect  to  see  it  signed  under  his  own  hand,  that  he 


Personal  Government  of  George  III         499 

is  resolved  to  keep  the  empire  entire,  and  that  no  troops  shall 
consequently  be  withdrawn  from  thence  (i.e.  America),  nor  inde- 
pendence ever  allowed."  It  was  not  without  reason  that  this 
deplorable  contest  was  called  the  king's  war. 

At  this  time  it  was  openly  avowed  in  the  House  of  Commons  by 
Lord  George  Germaine,  that  the  king  was  his  own  minister,  and 
Mr.  Fox  lamented  "that  his  Majesty  was  his  own  unadvised  min- 
ister." Nor  was  it  unnatural  that  the  king  should  expect  such 
submission  from  other  statesmen,  when  his  first  minister  was 
carrying  out  a  policy  of  which  he  disapproved,  but  wanted  reso- 
lution to  resist,  and  when  Parliament  had  hitherto  supported  his 
ill-omened  measures.  Lord  North  did  not  conceal  his  own  views 
concerning  the  continuance  of  the  American  war.  In  announcing 
to  the  king  the  resignation  of  Lord  Gower,  who  was  of  opinion  that 
the  contest  "must  end  in  ruin  to  his  Majesty  and  the  country," 
he  said,  "in  the  argument  Lord  North  had  certainly  one  disad- 
vantage, which  is  that  he  held  in  his  heart,  and  has  held  for  three 
years  past,  the  same  opinion  as  Lord  Gower."  Yet  the  minister 
submitted  to  the  stronger  will  of  his  royal  master. 

Again,  however,  the  king  was  reduced  to  treat  with  the  opposi- 
tion ;  but  was  not  less  resolute  in  his  determination  that  no  change 
of  ministers  should  affect  the  policy  of  his  measures.  On  the 
3rd  December,  1779,  he  was  prevailed  upon  to  give  Lord  Thurlow 
authority  to  open  a  negotiation  with  the  leaders  of  the  opposition 
and  expressed  his  willingness  "to  admit  into  his  confidence  and 
service  any  men  of  public  spirit  and  talents  who  will  join  with 
part  of  the  present  ministry  in  forming  one  on  a  more  enlarged 
scale,  provided  it  be  understood  that  every  means  are  to  be  em- 
ployed to  keep  the  empire  entire,  to  prosecute  the  present  just  and 
unprovoked  war  in  all  its  branches,  with  the  utmost  vigor,  and  that 
his  Majesty's  past  measures  be  treated  with  proper  respect." 
Finding  the  compliance  of  independent  statesmen  less  ready  than  he 
desired,  he  writes  to  Lord  Thurlow,  on  the  i8th  December:  "From 
the  cold  disdain  with  which  I  am  treated,  it  is  evident  to  me  what 
treatment  I  am  to  expect  from  the  opposition,  if  I  was  to  call  them 
into  my  service.  To  obtain  their  support,  I  must  deliver  up  my 
person,  my  principles,  and  my  dominions  into  their  hands."  In 
other  words,  the  king  dreaded  the  admission  of  any  ministers  to 
his  councils  who  claimed  an  independent  judgment  upon  the  policy 
for  which  they  would  become  responsible. 


500  English  Historians 


§  5.   Protest  against  Royal  Intervention 

In  the  meantime  the  increasing  influence  of  the  crown  and  the 
active  personal  exercise  of  its  prerogatives  were  attracting  the  at- 
tention of  the  people  and  of  Parliament.  In  the  debate  on  the 
address  at  the  opening  of  Parliament,  on  the  25th  November,  1779, 
Mr.  Fox  said:  "He  saw  very  early  indeed,  in  the  present  reign, 
the  plan  of  government  which  had  been  laid  down,  and  had  since 
been  invariably  pursued  in  every  department.  It  was  not  the 
mere  rumor  of  the  streets  that  the  king  was  his  own  minister;  the 
fatal  truth  was  evident,  and  had  made  itself  evident  in  every  cir- 
cumstance of  the  war  carried  on  against  America  and  the  West 
Indies."  This  was  denied  by  ministers;  but  evidence,  not  acces- 
sible to  contemporaries,  has  since  made  his  statement  indisputable. 

Early  in  the  following  year  numerous  public  meetings  were 
held,  associations  formed,  and  petitions  presented  in  favor  of 
economic  reforms,  and  complaining  of  the  undue  influence  of  the 
crown,  and  of  the  patronage  and  corruption  by  which  it  was  main- 
tained. It  was  for  the  redress  of  these  grievances  that  Mr.  Burke 
offered  his  celebrated  scheme  of  economical  reform.  He  con- 
fessed that  the  main  object  of  this  scheme  was  "the  reduction  of 
that  corrupt  influence  which  is  itself  the  perennial  spring  of  all 
prodigality  and  of  all  disorder,  which  loads  us  more  than  millions 
of  debt,  which  takes  away  vigor  from  our  arms,  wisdom  from  our 
councils,  and  every  shadow  of  authority  and  credit  from  the  most 
venerable  parts  of  our  constitution." 

On  the  6th  April  Mr.  Dunning  moved  resolutions,  in  a  committee 
of  the  whole  House,  founded  upon  these  petitions.  The  first,  which  is 
memorable  in  political  history,  affirmed  "that  the  influence  of  the 
crown  has  increased,  is  increasing,  and  ought  to  be  diminished." 
The  Lord  Advocate,  Mr.  Dundas,  endeavored  to  diminish  the  force 
of  this  resolution  by  the  prefatory  words,  "that  it  is  necessary  to 
declare";  but  Mr.  Fox,  on  behalf  of  the  opposition,  at  once  as- 
sented to  this  amendment,  and  the  resolution  was  carried  by  a 
majority  of  eighteen.  A  second  resolution  was  agreed  to,  without 
a  division,  affirming  the  right  of  the  House  to  correct  abuses  in  the 
civil  list  expenditure,  and  every  other  branch  of  the  public  revenue; 
and  also  a  third,  affirming  "that  it  is  the  duty  of  this  House  to  pro- 
vide, as  far  as  may  be,  an  immediate  and  effectual  redress  of  the 
abuses  complained  of  in  the  petitions  presented  to  this  House." 
The  opposition,  finding  themselves  in  a  majority,  pushed  forward 


Personal  Government  of  George  III         501 

their  success.  They  would  consent  to  no  delay,  and  these  reso- 
lutions were  immediately  reported  and  agreed  to  by  the  House. 
This  debate  was  signalized  by  the  opposition  speech  of  Sir  Fletcher 
Norton,  the  speaker,  who  bore  his  personal  testimony  to  the  in- 
creased and  increasing  influence  of  the  crown.  The  king,  writing 
to  Lord  North  on  the  nth  April  concerning  these  obnoxious  reso- 
lutions, said,  "I  wish  I  did  not  feel  at  whom  they  were  personally 
levelled." 

The  same  matters  were  also  debated,  in  this  session,  in  the 
House  of  Lords.  The  debate  on  the  Earl  of  Shelburne's  motion, 
of  the  8th  February,  for  an  inquiry  into  the  public  expenditure, 
brought  out  further  testimonies  to  the  influence  of  the  crown.  Of 
these  the  most  remarkable  was  given  by  the  Marquis  of  Rock- 
ingham,  who  asserted  that  since  the  accession  of  the  king  there 
had  been  ' '  a  fixed  determination  to  govern  this  country  under  the 
forms  of  law,  through  the  influence  of  the  crown."  Everything 
within  and  without,  whether  in  cabinet,  Parliament,  or  elsewhere, 
carried  about  it  the  most  unequivocal  marks  of  such  a  system ;  the 
whole  economy  of  executive  government,  in  all  its  branches,  pro- 
claimed it,  whether  professional,  deliberative,  or  official.  The 
supporters  of  it  in  books,  pamphlets,  and  newspapers  avowed  it, 
and  defended  it  without  reserve.  It  was  early  in  the  present 
reign  promulgated  as  a  court  axiom,  "that  the  power  and  influence 
of  the  crown  alone  were  sufficient  to  support  any  set  of  men  his 
Majesty  might  think  proper  to  call  to  his  councils."  The  fact 
bore  evidence  of  its  truth;  for  through  the  influence  of  the  crown, 
majorities  had  been  procured  to  support  any  men  or  any  measures, 
which  aa  administration,  thus  constituted,  thought  proper  to  dic- 
tate. 

This  very  motion  provoked  the  exercise  of  prerogative,  in  an 
arbitrary  and  offensive  form,  in  order  to  influence  the  votes  of 
peers,  and  to  intimidate  opponents.  The  Marquis  of  Car- 
marthen and  the  Earl  of  Pembroke  had  resigned  their  offices  in 
the  household,  in  order  to  give  an  independent  vote.  Before  the 
former  had  voted,  he  received  notice  that  he  was  dismissed  from 
the  lord-lieutenancy  of  the  East  Riding  of  the  county  of  York; 
and  soon  after  the  latter  had  recorded  his  vote,  he  was  dismissed 
from  the  lord-lieutenancy  of  Wiltshire,  an  office  which  had  been 
held  by  his  family,  at  different  times,  for  centuries.  This  flagrant 
exercise  of  prerogative  could  not  escape  the  notice  of  Parliament, 
and  on  the  6th  March  Lord  Shelburne  moved  an  address  praying 
the  king  to  acquaint  the  House  whether  he  had  been  advised,  and  by 


502  English  Historians 

whom,  to  dismiss  these  peers  "from  their  employments,  for  their 
conduct  in  Parliament."  The  motion  was  negatived  by  a  large 
majority;  but  the  unconstitutional  acts  of  the  king  were  strongly 
condemned  in  debate,  and  again  animadversions  were  made 
upon  the  influence  of  the  crown,  more  especially  in  the  admin- 
istration of  the  army  and  militia. 

On  the  meeting  of  Parliament,  on  the  27th  November,  1781, 
amendments  were  moved  in  both  houses,  in  answer  to  the  king's 
speech,  when  strong  opinions  were  expressed  regarding  the  influ- 
ence of  the  crown,  and  the  irregular  and  irresponsible  system 
under  which  the  government  of  the  country  was  conducted.  The 
Duke  of  Richmond  said  "that  the  country  was  governed  by  clerks 
—  each  minister  confining  himself  to  his  own  office  —  and,  conse- 
quently, instead  of  responsibility,  union  of  opinion,  and  concerted 
measures  nothing  was  displayed  but  dissension,  weakness,  and  cor- 
ruption." The  "interior  cabinet,"  he  declared,  had  been  the  ruin 
of  this  country.  The  Marquis  of  Rockingham  described  the 
system  of  government  pursued  since  the  commencement  of  the 
reign  as  "a  prospective  system  —  a  system  of  favoritism  and 
secret  influence."  Mr.  Fox  imputed  all  the  defeats  and  disasters 
of  the  American  war  to  the  influence  of  the  crown. 

§6.   Fall  of  Lord  North 

The  king  was  never  diverted,  by  defeat  and  disaster,  from  his 
resolution  to  maintain  the  war  with  America,  but  the  House  of 
Commons  was  now  determined  upon  peace,  and  a  struggle  ensued 
which  was  to  decide  the  fate  of  the  minister,  and  to  overcome, 
by  the  power  of  Parliament,  the  stubborn  will  of  the  king.  On 
the  22nd  February,  1 782,  General  Conway  moved  an  address  depre- 
cating the  continuance  of  the  war,  but  was  defeated  by  a  majority 
of  one.  On  the  27th  he  proposed  another  address  with  the  same 
object.  Lord  North  begged  for  a  short  respite;  but  an  adjourn- 
ment being  refused  by  a  majority  of  nineteen,  the  motion  was 
agreed  to  without  a  division. 

On  the  receipt  of  the  king's  answer,  General  Conway  moved  a 
resolution  that  "the  House  will  consider  as  enemies  to  the  king  and 
country  all  who  shall  advise,  or  by  any  means  attempt,  the  further 
prosecution  of  offensive  war,  for  the  purpose  of  reducing  the  re- 
volted colonies  to  obedience  by  force."  In  reply  to  this  proposal, 
Lord  North  astonished  the  House  by  announcing,  not  that  he  pro- 
posed to  resign  on  the  reversal  of  the  policy,  to  which  he  was 


503 

pledged,  but  that  he  was  prepared  to  give  effect  to  the  instructions 
of  the  House.  Mr.  Fox  repudiated  the  principle  of  a  minister 
remaining  in  office,  to  carry  out  the  policy  of  his  opponents, 
against  his  own  judgment,  and  General  Conway's  resolution  was 
agreed  to.  Lord  North,  however,  persevered  with  his  proposi- 
tions for  peace,  and  declared  his  determination  to  retain  office 
until  the  king  should  command  him  to  resign,  or  the  House  should 
point  out  to  him  in  the  clearest  manner  the  propriety  of  with- 
drawing. No  time  was  lost  in  pressing  him  with  the  latter  alter- 
native. On  the  8th  March  a  motion  of  Lord  John  Cavendish,  charg- 
ing all  the  misfortunes  of  the  war  upon  the  incompetency  of  the 
ministers,  was  lost  by  a  majority  of  ten.  On  the  i5th  Sir  J.  Rons 
moved  that  "the  House  could  no  longer  repose  confidence  in  the 
present  ministers,"  and  his  motion  was  negatived  by  a  majority 
of  nine.  On  the  soth  the  assault  was  about  to  be  repeated,  when 
Lord  North  announced  his  resignation. 

The  king  had  watched  this  struggle  with  great  anxiety,  as  one 
personal  to  himself.  Writing  to  Lord  North  on  the  i7th  March, 
after  the  motion  of  Sir  J.  Rous,  he  said,  "I  am  resolved  not  to 
throw  myself  into  the  hands  of  the  opposition  at  all  events,  and 
shall  certainly,  if  things  go  as  they  seem  to  tend,  know  what  my  con- 
science as  well  as  honor  dictates,  as  the  only  way  left  for  me." 
He  even  desired  the  royal  yacht  to  be  prepared,  and  talked  as  if 
nothing  were  now  left  for  him  but  to  retire  to  Hanover.  But  it 
had  become  impossible  to  retain  any  longer  in  his  service  that 
"confidential  minister,"  whom  he  had  "always  treated  more  as 
his  friend  than  minister."  By  the  earnest  solicitations  of  the  king, 
Lord  North  had  been  induced  to  retain  office  against  his  own  wishes ; 
he  had  persisted  in  a  policy  of  which  he  disapproved,  and  when 
forced  to  abandon  it,  he  still  held  his  ground,  in  order  to  protect  the 
king  from  the  intrusion  of  those  whom  his  Majesty  regarded  as 
his  personal  enemies.  He  was  now  fairly  driven  from  his  post, 
and  the  king,  appreciating  the  personal  devotion  of  his  minister, 
rewarded  his  zeal  and  fidelity  with  a  munificent  present  from  the 
privy  purse. 

The  king's  correspondence  with  Lord  North  gives  us  a  re- 
markable insight  into  the  relations  of  his  Majesty  with  that  min- 
ister, and  with  the  government  of  the  country.  Not  only  did  he 
direct  the  minister  in  all  important  matters  of  foreign  and  domestic 
policy,  but  he  instructed  him  as  to  the  management  of  debates 
in  Parliament,  suggested  what  motions  should  be  made  or  opposed, 
and  how  measures  should  be  carried,  He  reserved  to  himself 


504  English  Historians 

all  the  patronage;  he  arranged  the  entire  cast  of  the  administra- 
tion; settled  the  relative  places  and  pretensions  of  ministers  of 
state,  of  law  officers,  and  members  of  his  household;  nominated 
and  promoted  the  English  and  Scotch  judges,  appointed  and 
translated  bishops,  nominated  deans,  and  dispensed  other  prefer- 
ments in  the  Church.  He  disposed  of  military  governments, 
regiments,  and  commissions,  and  himself  ordered  the  marching 
of  troops.  He  gave  or  refused  titles,  honors,  and  pensions.  All 
his  directions  were  peremptory :  Louis  the  Great  himself  could  not 
have  been  more  royal ;  he  enjoyed  the  consciousness  of  power,  and 
felt  himself  "every  inch  a  king." 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Lecky,  History  of  England  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  Vols.  HI  and  IV, 
consult  table  of  contents  on  above  topics.  Stanhope  (Lord  Mahon),  History 
oj  England  from  /7/j  to  1783,  consult  table  of  contents. 


CHAPTER   IV 

THE  INDUSTRIAL   REVOLUTION 

THE  great  religious  and  political  revolutions  which  England  had 
undergone  since  the  Middle  Ages  had  left  the  country  still  mediaeval 
in  its  main  features.  The  English  people  continued  to  live,  work, 
and  travel  in  very  much  the  same  way  as  they  had  in  the  day  of 
King  John.  If  a  larger  portion  of  the  people  lived  in  towns  than 
in  that  day,  still  they  were  not  the  factory  towns  which  one  sees  now, 
but  rather  overgrown  country  villages.  Over  a  vast  portion  of  the 
country  one  could  see  traces  of  mediaeval  economy  in  the  primitive 
common  field  system  of  agriculture.  Even  those  who  were  not 
engaged  in  tilling  the  soil  were  often  not  entirely  divorced  from  it, 
but  spent  a  portion  of  their  time  away  from  their  industries  work- 
ing in  the  fields.  The  majority  of  the  people  were  as  ignorant  as 
they  had  been  centuries  before,  and  as  excluded  from  the  political 
life  of  the  nation  as  the  peasant  in  the  day  when  Magna  Carta 
was  sigiied.  Suddenly  there  was  introduced  a  series  of  inventions 
which  completely  altered  the  old  ways  of  living  and  working.  The 
cottage  workshops  gave  place  to  great  factories  in  which  were  col- 
lected the  thousands  of  workmen  whose  hand-instruments  of  pro- 
duction were  rendered  obsolete  by  the  steam  engine.  Production 
which  had  hitherto  been  carried  on  for  use  or  exchange  in  a  re- 
stricted market  gave  place  to  production  in  which  profit  was  the 
driving  motive.  The  intellectual  and  economic  rigidity  of  the 
Middle  Ages  was  broken  by  steadily  intensifying  competition,  shift- 
ing of  population,  and  constant  changes  in  technical  processes. 
Two  new  classes  sprang  rapidly  into  existence,  the  owners  of  the 
new  factories  and  the  workers  in  them.  This  far-reaching  revo- 
lution, whose  undreamt-of  possibilities  are  not  yet  realized,  lies 

5°5 


506  English  Historians 

at  the  bottom  of  the  great  political,  reform,  imperial,  and  literary 
movements  of  the  nineteenth  century.  To  study  these  without 
their  economic  foundations  is  to  miss  the  underlying  forces  of 
modern  history. 

§  i.    The  Opening  of  a  New  Era  l 

The  period,  which  opened  with  Arkwright's  mechanical  inven- 
tions, has  been  the  commencement  of  a  new  era  in  the  economic 
history,  not  only  of  England,  but  of  the  whole  world.  It  marked 
one  of  the  great  stages  in  the  growth  of  human  power  to  master 
nature.  The  discovery  of  the  New  World,  and  of  the  sea  route 
to  India,  had  been  events  which  gradually  altered  the  whole 
method  and  scale  on  which  European  commerce  was  carried  on. 
The  application  of  water-power  and  of  steam,  to  do  the  work 
which  had  been  previously  accomplished  by  human  drudgery,  is 
comparable  with  the  commercial  revolution  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, as  a  new  departure  of  which  we  do  not  even  yet  see  the  full 
significance.  Physical  forces  have  been  utilized  so  as  to  aid  man 
in  his  work;  and  the  introduction  of  machinery  continues  slowly, 
but  surely,  to  revolutionize  the  habits  and  organizations  of  indus- 
trial life  in  all  parts  of  the  globe.  Half-civilized  and  barbarous 
peoples  are  compelled  to  have  recourse,  as  far  as  may  be,  to  modern 
weapons  and  modern  means  of  communication ;  they  cannot  hold 
aloof,  or  deny  themselves  the  use  of  such  appliances.  But  the 
adoption  of  modern  methods  of  production  and  traffic  is  hardly 
consistent  with  the  maintenance  of  the  old  social  order,  in  any 
country  on  this  earth. 

England  was  the  pioneer  of  the  application  of  mechanism  to  in- 
dustry, and  thus  became  the  workshop  of  the  world,  so  that  other 
countries  have  been  inspired  by  her  example.  The  policy  of 
endeavoring  to  retain  the  advantages  of  machinery  for  England 
alone  was  mooted,  but  never  very  seriously  pursued,  and  it  was 
definitely  abandoned  in  1825.  The  changes  which  have  taken 
place  in  England,  during  the  last  hundred  and  thirty  years,  at 
least  suggest  the  direction  of  the  movements  which  may  be  ex- 
pected in  other  lands,  as  they  are  drawn  more  and  more  to  adapt 
themselves  to  modern  conditions.  The  time  has  not  yet  come  to 
write  the  history  of  the  industrial  revolution  in  its  broader  aspects, 

'Cunningham,  Growth  of  English  Industry  and  Commerce  (1003).  Vol. 
II,  Part  2,  pp.  OOQ  ff.  By  permission  of  Dr.  Cunningham  and  the  Cam- 
bridge University  Press. 


The  Industrial   Revolution  507 

for  we  only  know  the  beginning  of  the  story;  we  can  trace  the 
origin  and  immediate  results  in  England,  but  we  cannot  yet  gauge 
its  importance  for  the  world  as  a  whole. 

§  2.   Reasons  for  English  Leadership 

It  was  not  an  accident  that  England  took  the  lead  in  this  matter; 
the  circumstances  of  the  day  afforded  most  favorable  conditions 
for  the  successful  introduction  of  new  appliances.  Inventions  and 
discoveries  often  seem  to  be  merely  fortuitous;  men  are  apt  to 
regard  the  new  machinery  as  the  outcome  of  a  special  and  uncon- 
trollable burst  of  inventive  genius  in  the  eighteenth  century.  But 
we  are  not  forced  to  be  content  with  such  a  meagre  explanation. 
To  point  out  that  Arkwright  and  Watt  were  fortunate  in  the  fact 
that  the  times  were  ripe  for  them,  is  not  to  detract  from  their 
merits.  There  had  been  many  ingenious  men  from  the  time  of 
William  Lee  and  Dodo  Dudley,  but  the  conditions  of  their  day 
Were  unfavorable  to  their  success.  The  introduction  of  expensive 
implements,  or  processes,  involves  a  large  outlay;  it  is  not  worth 
while  for  any  man,  however  energetic,  to  make  the  attempt,  unless 
he  has  a  considerable  command  of  capital,  and  has  access  to  large 
markets.  In  the  eighteenth  century  these  conditions  were  being 
more  and  more  realized.  The  institution  of  the  Bank  of  England, 
and  of  other  banks,  had  given  a  great  impulse  to  the  formation  of 
capital;  and  it  was  much  more  possible  than  it  had  ever  been 
before  for  a  capable  man  to  obtain  the  means  of  introducing 
costly  ''mprovements  in  the  management  of  his  business.  It  had 
become  apparent,  too,  that  the  long-continued  efforts  to  build  up 
the  maritime  power  of  England  had  been  crowned  with  success; 
she  had  established  commercial  connections  with  all  parts  of  the 
globe,  and  had  access  to  markets  that  were  practically  unlimited. 
Under  these  circumstances,  enterprising  men  were  willing  to  run 
the  risk  of  introducing  expensive  novelties,  and  inventors  could 
reasonably  hope  to  reap  advantage  themselves  from  the  improve- 
ments they  suggested. 

In  the  seventeenth  century  such  an  expansion  had  hardly  been 
possible  at  all;  the  dominant  principles  were  still  in  favor  of  a 
well-ordered  trade,  to  be  maintained  by  securing  special  con- 
cessions; the  interlopers,  who  were  prepared  to  contest  such 
privileges  and  to  force  their  business  on  any  terms  they  could,  were 
still  regarded  as  injurious  to  the  sound  and  healthy  development 
of  commerce.  But  after  the  revolution,  England  entered  on  a  new 


508  English  Historians 

phase  of  mercantile  life;  and  the  keen  competition  which  had 
been  allowed  free  play  temporarily  during  the  Interregnum,  with 
disastrous  results,  came  to  be  accepted  as  the  ordinary  atmos- 
phere of  trade.  The  principles,  which  the  interlopers  had  prac- 
tised, were  being  more  generally  adopted,  and  all  merchants 
became  agreed  that  it  was  by  pushing  their  wares,  and  selling 
goods  that  were  better  and  cheaper  than  those  of  other  countries, 
that  new  markets  could  be  opened  up  and  old  ones  retained.  The 
"well-ordered  trade"  of  the  merchant  companies  would  hardly 
have  afforded  sufficient  scope  for  the  introduction  of  mechanical 
improvements  in  manufacturing.  In  the  civic  commerce  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  and  during  the  seventeenth  century,  merchants  had 
looked  to  well-defined  and  restricted  markets  in  which  they  held 
exclusive  rights.  So  long  as  this  was  the  case,  attempts  were  made 
to  carry  on  industrial  production  so  as  just  to  meet  these  limited 
requirements,  and  to  secure  conditions  for  the  artisan,  by  guard- 
ing him  from  competition  and  authoritatively  assessing  his  wages. 
As  merchants  and  manufacturers  realized  that  they  could  best  gain 
and  keep  foreign  markets,  not  by  special  privileges,  but  by  sup- 
plying the  required  goods  at  low  rates,  they  aimed  at  introducing 
the  conditions  of  manufacture  under  which  industrial  expansion 
is  possible.  This  opinion  commended  itself  more  and  more  to 
men  of  business  and  legislators,  but  it  penetrated  slowly  among  the 
artisans,  who  preferred  the  stability  of  the  life  they  enjoyed  under 
a  system  of  regulation  and  restriction.  Workmen  were  inclined 
to  oppose  the  introduction  of  machinery  in  so  far  as  it  tended  to 
upset  the  old-established  order  of  the  realm,  while  others  seem  to 
have  hoped  that  machinery  would  confer  on  England  a  monopoly 
of  industrial  power  so  that  she  would  be  able  to  dictate  her  own 
terms  to  foreign  purchasers,  and  to  rear  up  a  new  exclusive  system. 

§  3.   Decline  0}  the  Regulative  Policy 

The  old  ideas,  which  had  given  rise  to  the  trade  institutions  of 
the  Middle  Ages,  and  which  had  continued  to  be  dominant  in  the 
seventeenth  century,  were  not  dead  at  the  opening  of  the  nine- 
teenth century,  but  they  no  longer  appealed  either  to  the  capitalist 
classes  or  to  the  intelligence  of  Parliament.  No  authoritative 
attempt  was  made  to  recast  the  existing  regulations  so  as  to  suit 
the  changing  conditions.  To  do  so  was  not  really  practicable; 
only  two  courses  lay  open  to  the  legislators.  They  could  either 
forbid  the  introduction  of  machinery,  as  Charles  I  had  done,  for 


The  Industrial   Revolution  509 

fear  that  people  would  be  thrown  out  of  work,  or  they  could  smooth 
the  way  for  the  introduction  of  the  new  methods  by  removing  the 
existing  barriers.  The  House  of  Commons  chose  the  latter 
alternative,  since  the  members  had  come  to  regard  all  efforts 
to  prevent  the  use  of  mechanical  appliances  as  alike  futile  and 
inexpedient. 

In  the  absence  of  any  enforcement  of  the  old  restrictions,  in 
regard  to  the  hours  and  terms  of  employment,  the  difficulties  of 
the  transition  were  intensified;  and  the  laborers,  who  had  never 
been  subjected  to  such  misery  under  the  old  regime,  agitated  for 
the  thorough  enforcement  of  the  Elizabethan  laws.  The  working 
classes,  for  the  most  part,  took  their  stand  on  the  opinions  as  to 
industrial  policy  which  had  been  traditional  in  this  country,  and 
were  embodied  in  existing  legislation.  To  the  demand  of  the 
capitalist  for  perfect  freedom  for  industrial  progress,  the  laborers 
were  inclined  to  reply  by  taking  an  attitude  of  impracticable  con- 
servatism; it  was  not  till  many  years  had  elapsed,  and-freedom 
for  economic  enterprise  had  been  secured,  that  serious  attempts 
were  made,  from  an  entirely  different  point  of  view,  to  control  the 
new  industrial  system  so  that  its  proved  evils  should  be  reduced  to 
a  minimum.  The  artisans  were  so  much  attached  to  the  tradi- 
tional methods  of  securing  the  well-being  of  the  laborer  that  they 
hung  aloof  for  a  time  from  the  humanitarian  effort  to  remedy  par- 
ticular abuses  by  new  legislation. 

§  4.   Extent  and  Character  o)  the  Industrial  Changes 

We  have  no  adequate  means  of  gauging  the  rapidity  and  violence 
of  the  industrial  revolution  which  occurred  in  England  during  the 
seventy  years  from  1770  to  1840;  it  commenced  with  the  changes 
in  the  hardware  trades,  which  have  been  already  described,  but 
the  crisis  occurred  when  inventive  progress  extended  to  the  textile 
trades.  Despite  the  gradual  development,  it  seems  likely  enough 
that,  while  centuries  passed,  there  was  little  alteration  in  the  gen- 
eral aspect  of  England;  but  the  whole  face  of  the  country  was 
changed  by  the  industrial  revolution.  In  1770  there  was  no 
Black  Country,  blighted  by  the  conjunction  of  coal  and  iron  trades; 
there  were  no  canals,  or  railways,  and  no  factory  towns  with  their 
masses  of  population.  The  differentiation  of  town  and  country 
had  not  been  carried  nearly  so  far  as  it  is  to-day.  All  the  familiar 
features  of  our  modern  life,  and  all  its  most  pressing  problems, 
have  come  to  the  front  within  the  last  century  and  a  quarter. 


510  English   Historians 

The  changes  included  in  the  term  industrial  revolution  are  so 
complicated  and  so  various  that  it  is  not  easy  to  state,  far  less  to 
solve,  the  questions  which  they  raise.  There  have  been  many 
different  forms  of  industrial  invention.  Sometimes  there  has  been 
the  introduction  of  new  processes,  as  in  the  important  series  of 
experiments  by  which  the  problem  of  smelting  and  working  iron, 
with  fuel  obtained  from  coal,  was  finally  solved;  and  this,  as  we 
have  seen,  was  of  extraordinary  importance.  Other  improve- 
ments .have  consisted  in  the  employment  of  new  implements,  by 
which  the  skilled  laborer  is  assisted  to  do  his  work  more  quickly 
or  better;  one  example  has  been  noticed  in  the  flying  shuttle,  and 
the  substitution  of  the  spinning-wheel  for  the  whorl  and  spindle 
was  another.  But  such  a  change  is  hardly  to  be  described  as  the 
introduction  of  machinery.  A  machine,  as  commonly  understood, 
does  not  assist  a  man  to  do  his  work ;  it  does  the  work  itself,  under 
human  guidance ;  its  characteristic  feature  is  that  it  is  an  application 
of  power,  and  not  of  human  exertion.  Hence  the  introduction  of 
machinery  always  has  a  very  direct  bearing  on  the  position  of  the 
laborer.  From  one  point  of  view  we  may  say  that  it  saves  him 
from  drudgery;  from  another,  that  it  forces  upon  him  the  strain 
of  a  competition  in  which  he  is  overmatched,  and  thus  gradually 
deprives  him  of  employment.  The  invention  of  new  processes 
and  new  implements  has  not  such  a  necessary  and  direct  result 
on  the  employment  and  remuneration  of  labor  as  occurs  with  the 
introduction  of  machines.  So  far  as  the  wealth  of  the  realm  was 
concerned,  the  development  of  the  coal  and  iron  trades  was  of 
extraordinary  importance,  but  the  substitution  of  mechanical  in- 
ventions for  hand  labor  in  the  textile  trades  brought  about  a 
revolution  in  social  life  throughout  the  country. 

Though  the  changes  effected  by  the  industrial  revolution  have 
been  so  startling,  it  may  be  yet  said,  when  we  view  them  from  an 
economic  standpoint,  that  they  were  of  unexampled  violence  rather 
than  wholly  new.  After  all,  the  age  of  mechanical  invention  was 
only  one  phase  of  a  larger  movement.  We  have  traced  the  gradual 
intervention  of  capital  in  industry  and  agriculture,  especially  dur- 
ing the  eighteenth  century;  we  shall  now  have  to  note  the  opera- 
tion of  the  same  force,  but  at  a  greatly  accelerated  pace.  Capital 
obtained  a  footing  and  held  its  ground  in  the  cloth  trade,  because 
of  the  facilities  which  the  wealthy  man  enjoyed  for  purchasing 
materials,  or  for  meeting  the  markets.  Other  trades,  such  as  coal 
mining  or  iron  manufacture,  had  been  necessarily  capitalistic  in 
type  from  the  earliest  days,  because  none  but  wealthy  men  were 


The  Industrial  Revolution  511 

able  to  purchase  an  expensive  plant,  and  to  run  risks  of  setting  it 
up.  The  invention  of  mechanical  appliances  for  the  textile  trades 
gave  a  still  greater  advantage  to  the  rich  employer,  as  compared 
with  the  domestic  weaver,  since  only  substantial  men  could  afford 
to  employ  machines.  It  was  a  further  sign  of  the  triumph  of  the 
modern  system  of  business  management. 

§  5.  Effect  of  Machinery  on  Labor 

It  is  worth  while  to  distinguish  some  of  the  principal  changes 
in  connection  with  labor  which  resulted  from  the  increase  of 
capitalist  organization  and  especially  from  machine  production. 
The  opening  chapter  of  the  Wealth  of  Nations  calls  attention  to 
the  important  improvement  which  is  known  as  the  division  of 
processes.  Adam  Smith  there  points  out  that  an  employer  can 
organize  production,  and  assign  each  man  his  own  particular  task 
in  such  a  way,  that  there  shall  be  a  saving  of  time  and  of  skill. 
There  will  also  be  other  advantages,  such  as  increase  of  deftness, 
from  the  acquired  facility  in  doing  some  one  operation  rapidly  and 
well.  The  division  of  processes  is  sure  to  arise  under  any  capital- 
ist system  of  control;  in  some  districts  of  the  cloth  trade,  it  had 
been  carried  out  to  a  very  considerable  extent  for  centuries,  and  it 
is  true  to  say  that  increased  subdivision  has  facilitated  the  invention 
of  machinery.  None  the  less  is  it  also  true  that  the  adoption  of 
mechanical  appliances  has  led  to  the  development  of  new  forms 
of  specialized  labor,  and  has  tended  to  confine  men  more  exclu- 
sively to  particular  departments  of  work. 

The  invention  of  machinery,  as  well  as  the  introduction  of  new 
processes,  brought  about  a  considerable  shifting  of  labor.  The 
employment  of  coal  for  smelting  iron  tended  to  the  disuse  of  char- 
coal burning,  and  caused  an  increased  demand  for  hewers  in  coal 
mines ;  whether  there  was  less  employment  or  more,  in  connection 
with  the  production  of  a  ton  of  suitable  fuel,  it  was  employment  of 
a  different  kind.  The  adoption  of  machinery  in  the  textile  trades 
also  caused  an  extraordinary  shifting  of  labor,  for  children  were 
quite  competent  to  tend  machines  which  carried  on  work  that  had 
hitherto  occupied  adults.  On  the  whole,  machinery  rendered  it 
possible  in  many  departments  of  industry  to  substitute  unskilled 
for  skilled  labor. 

The  tendency,  which  had  been  observable  during  the  early  part 
of  the  century,  for  manufacturers  to  migrate  to  particular  districts, 
was  enormously  accelerated  by  the  introduction  of  machinery.  So 


512  English  Historians 

far  as  the  cloth  trade  was  concerned,  the  trend  appears  to  have 
been  due  to  the  facilities  which  water-power  afforded  for  fulling- 
mills;  and  as  one  invention  after  another  was  introduced,  it 
became  not  merely  advantageous,  but  necessary  for  the  manu- 
facturer to  establish  his  business  at  some  place  where  power  was 
available.  We  have  in  consequence  the  rapid  concentration  of 
industries  in  the  West  Riding  and  other  areas  where  water-power 
could  be  had,  and  the  comparative  desertion  of  low-lying  and  level 
districts.  The  application  of  steam-power  caused  a  further 
readjustment  in  favor  of  the  coal-producing  areas;  but  this  new 
development  did  not  resuscitate  the  decaying  industries  of  the 
eastern  counties,  since  they  were  as  badly  off  for  coal  as  they 
were  for  water-power. 

The  introduction  of  machinery  rendered  it  necessary  to  con- 
centrate the  laborers  in  factories  where  the  machines  were  in  opera- 
tion ;  the  new  methods  of  work  were  incompatible  with  the  continued 
existence  of  cottage  industry.  The  man  who  worked  in  his  own 
house,  whether  as  a  wage-earner  under  the  capitalist  system  or  as 
an  independent  tradesman  under  the  domestic  system,  was  no 
longer  required,  so  soon  as  it  was  proved  that  machine  production 
was  economically  better.  In  the  same  way,  the  concentration  of 
spinning  in  factories  deprived  the  women  of  a  by-employment  in 
their  cottage.  During  the  greater  part  of  the  eighteenth  century 
industrial  occupations  were  very  widely  diffused,  and  the  intercon- 
nection between  the  artisan  population  and  rural  occupation  was 
close.  The  severance  had  already  begun;  but  under  the  influence 
of  the  introduction  of  machinery  it  went  on  with  greater  rapidity, 
till  the  differentiation  of  town  from  country  employment  was 
practically  complete. 

The  divorce  of  the  industrial  population  from  the  soil  tended  on 
the  one  hand  to  the  impoverishment  of  the  rural  districts,  from 
which  manufactures  were  withdrawn,  and  on  the  other  to  a  notable 
change  in  the  position  of  the  workman;  he  came  to  be  wholly 
dependent  on  his  earnings,  and  to  have  no  other  source  to  which 
he  could  look  for  support.  The  cottage  weavers,  whether  wage- 
earners  or  independent  men,  had  had  the  opportunity  of  work  in 
the  fields  in  harvest  and  of  supplementing  their  income  from  their 
gardens  or  through  their  privileges  on  the  common  wastes.  When 
the  industrial  population  were  massed  in  factory  towns  they  were 
necessarily  deprived  of  these  subsidiary  sources  of  income,  and 
their  terms  of  employment  were  affected  by  the  state  of  trade.  So 
long  as  cottage  industry  lasted,  the  workmen  had  something  to 


The  Industrial   Revolution  513 

fall  back  upon  when  times  were  bad;  but  under  the  new  conditions 
the  fluctuations  were  much  more  violent  than  they  had  ever  been 
before,  and  the  workman  had  no  means  of  improving  his  position. 
The  prosperity  of  the  mass  of  the  population  no  longer  rested  on 
the  solid  basis  of  land,  but  upon  the  fluctuating  basis  of  trade. 

The  age  of  invention  then  was  not  merely  concerned,  as  might 
at  first  sight  appear,  with  the  improvement  of  particular  arts;  it 
effected  an  entire  revolution  in  the  economic  life  of  the  country ;  for 
this  reason  it  is  not  quite  easy  to  weigh  against  one  another  the 
loss  and  gain  involved  in  such  a  fundamental  change.  We  see  on 
the  one  hand  the  signs  of  marvellous  economic  progress,  an  im- 
mensely increased  command  over  material  resources  of  all  sorts 
and  an  extraordinary  development  of  trade  and  wealth,  with  the 
consequent  ability  to  cope  with  the  schemes  by  which  Napoleon 
endeavored  to  compass  our  ruin.  On  the  other  hand  we  see  a  loss 
of  stability  of  every  kind;  England  as  a  nation  forfeited  her  self- 
sufficing  character  and  became  dependent  on  an  imported  food 
supply;  and  a  large  proportion  of  the  population,  who  had  been 
fairly  secure  in  the  prospect  of  shelter  and  employment  and  sub- 
sistence for  their  lives,  were  reduced  to  a  condition  of  the  greatest 
uncertainty  as  to  their  lot  from  year  to  year  or  from  week  to  week. 
Over  against  the  rapid  advance  of  material  prosperity  must  be  set 
the  terrible  suffering  which  was  endured,  especially  in  the  period 
of  transition ;  and  while  we  congratulate  ourselves  on  the  progress 
that  has  taken  place,  we  should  not  forget  the  cost  at  which  it 
has  been  obtained,  or  the  elements  of  well-being  that  have  been 
sacrificed. 

§  6.   Rise  of  the  Capitalist  Class 

There  were,  however,  certain  sections  of  the  community  which 
were  able  to  take  advantage  of  the  period  of  change,  and  to  adapt 
themselves  rapidly  to  the  new  conditions;  a  class  of  capitalist 
manufacturers  came  into  great  prominence,  and  they  were  soon 
able  to  exercise  considerable  influence  in  Parliament.  There  had, 
of  course,  been  wealthy  employers  in  certain  districts,  especially  in 
the  iron  trade,  and  in  the  cloth  trade  of  the  west  of  England ;  but 
the  moneyed  men  of  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  had 
been  merchants  rather  than  manufacturers  of  textile  goods.  It 
was  only  with  the  progress  of  the  industrial  revolution  that  the 
wealthy  employer  of  labor  attained  to  anything  like  the  social  status 
which  had  been  accorded  to  successful  merchants  from  time 


5 14  English  Historians 

immemorial.  But  the  triumph  of  capital  in  industry  involved 
the  rise  and  prosperity  of  a  large  number  of  captains  of  industry. 
It  seems  probable  that  there  was  comparatively  little  room  for 
the  intrusion  of  new  men  in  the  old  centres  of  the  trades.  There 
were  large  and  well-established  houses  engaged  in  this  manufac- 
ture in  the  west  of  England,  and  they  had  an  honorable  ambition 
to  maintain  the  traditions  of  their  trades.  In  Yorkshire,  too,  there 
was  a  class  of  capitalist  merchants  who  were  ready  to  deflect  their 
energies  into  manufacturing  as  occasion  arose.  The  wealthy  em- 
ployers of  the  West  Riding  seem  to  have  been  chiefly  drawn  from 
this  class,  though  they  were  doubtless  reenforced  to  some  extent 
by  individuals  who  had  risen  from  the  ranks.  There  is  reason  to 
believe,  however,  that  in  Lancashire,  and  the  other  areas  where 
the  cotton  trade  was  carried  on,  the  course  of  affairs  was  some- 
what different.  This  industry  was  characterized  by  an  extraor- 
dinary expansion,  and  it  offered  abundant  opportunities  for  new 
men  of  energy  and  perseverance  to  force  their  way  to  the  front. 
"Few  of  the  men  who  entered  the  trade  rich  were  successful. 
They  trusted  too  much  to  others  —  too  little  to  themselves;  whilst 
on  the  contrary  the  men  who  prospered  were  raised  by  their  own 
efforts  commencing  in  a  humble  way,  generally  from  exercising 
some  handicraft,  as  clockmaking,  hatting,  etc.,  and  pushing  their 
advance  by  a  series  of  unceasing  exertions,  having  a  very  limited 
capital  to  begin  with,  or  even  none  at  all,  saving  their  own  labor." 
The  yeomen  farmers  as  a  class  failed  to  seize  the  opportunities 
open  to  them;  but  a  "few  of  these  men,  shaking  off  their  slothful 
habits,  both  of  body  and  mind,  devoted  themselves  to  remedying 
other  conditions  with  a  perseverance  certain  to  be  successful.  Join- 
ing to  this  determination  a  practical  acquaintance  with  the  details 
of  manufactures,  personal  superintendence  and  industry,  several 
of  the  most  eminently  successful  steam-manufacturers  have  sprung 
from  this  class  of  people,  and  have  long  since  become  the  most 
opulent  of  a  wealthy  community."  The  Peels  and  the  Strutts 
were  examples  of  families  which  emerged  from  the  ranks  of  the 
yeomen  and  acquired  great  wealth  in  the  cotton  trade.  Many  of 
the  rich  manufacturers  in  such  towns  as  Stockport,  Hyde,  Ducken- 
field,  and  Staleybridge  had  in  early  life  worked  as  "hatters,  shoe- 
makers, carters,  weavers,  or  some  other  trade."  Some  of  these 
self-made  men  were  not  disinclined  to  be  proud  of  their  own  suc- 
cess, and  to  be  at  once  hard  and  contemptuous  toward  the  man 
who  had  shown  so  little  energy  as  to  remain  in  the  laboring  class, 
as  if  it  was  less  his  fortune  than  his  fault. 


The  Industrial  Revolution 


§  7.    The  Manchester  School 

It  was  not  unnatural  that,  as  the  cotton  manufacture  continued 
to  increase,  Manchester  should  become  the  centre  of  a  school  of 
men  who  were  deeply  imbued  with  the  belief  that  in  industrial 
affairs  the  battle  was  to  the  strong  and  the  face  to  the  swift.  The 
system,  which  the  mercantilists  had  built  up  with  the  view  of 
stimulating  industry,  seemed  to  this  new  race  only  to  stifle  and 
hamper  it.  Under  somewhat  different  circumstances  the  capitalist 
employers  might  have  been  eager  to  secure  protection.  The  nou- 
veaux  riches  of  the  fourteenth  century  were  eager  to  protect  Eng- 
lish municipalities  against  the  intrusion  of  aliens;  the  merchant 
princes  of  the  seventeenth  century  organized  a  restrictive  system 
by  means  of  which  they  hoped  to  foster  the  English  industry  at 
the  expense  of  the  French  and  the  Dutch.  American  millionnaires 
have  found  their  protective  tariff  an  assistance  in  building  up 
gigantic  trusts.  It  is  at  least  conceivable  that  the  cotton  manu- 
facturers of  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  should  have 
endeavored  to  retain  for  a  time  a  monopoly  of  industrial  power,  and 
have  forced  other  peoples. to  pay  such  prices  as  would  have  enabled 
them  to  remodel  the  conditions  of  production  in  a  satisfactory 
fashion.  This  policy  would  have  commended  itself  to  the  minds 
of  the  artisans ;  had  it  been  adopted,  the  cleavage  between  capital 
and  labor  would  hardly  have  been  so  marked.  But  the  spirit  of 
keen  competition  had  caught  hold  of  the  employing  class;  they 
were  of  opinion,  and  in  all  probability  their  judgment  on  this  point 
was  perfectly  sound,  that  it  was  only  by  a  continued  exercise  of  the 
activity  by  which  they  had  found  their  way  into  foreign  markets 
that  they  could  hope  to  retain  them. 

The  Manchester  School  were  aiming  at  the  same  object  as  the 
mercantilists  had  pursued  during  the  period  of  Whig  ascendency : 
they  desired  to  promote  the  industrial  activity  of  the  country ;  but 
the  means  they  recommended  were  the  very  opposite  of  those 
which  had  been  adopted  in  earlier  days.  They  felt  that  they  could 
dispense  with  fostering  care  and  exclusive  privileges;  this  was.  in 
itself  a  tribute  to  the  success  of  the  policy  which  had  been  so  steadily 
pursued  for  generations.  The  maritime  power  of  England  had 
been  built  up,  the  industry  had  been  developed,  the  agriculture 
had  been  stimulated,  and  the  economic  life  had  become  so  vigorous 
that  it  appeared  to  have  outgrown  the  need  of  extraneous  help. 
There  seemed  to  be  a  danger  that  the  very  measures  which  had 


516  English  Historians 

been  intended  to  support  it  should  prove  to  be  fetters  that  ham- 
pered its  growth. 

§  8.   The  Introduction  of  Machinery  in  the  Textile  Trades 

The  cotton  manufacture  was  the  first  of  the  textile  trades  to  be 
revolutionized  by  the  introduction  of  new  machinery.  Appliances 
worked  by  power  had  been  in  operation  from  time  immemorial  in 
the  subsidiary  operations  of  the  woollen  trade,  such  as  the  fulling- 
mills,  and  silk-mills  had  been  erected  on  the  model  of  those  in 
Piedmont;  but  the  series  of  inventions  for  carding  and  spinning 
cotton,  which  is  associated  with  the  name  of  Richard  Arkvvright, 
marks  the  beginning  of  a  fresh  era.  He  had  been  brought  up  as  a 
barber,  and  does  not  appear  to  have  had  either  the  technical  ac- 
quaintance with  the  cotton  trade  or  the  mechanical  skill  which 
might  be  expected  in  a  great  inventor.  Still  he  possessed  such 
business  ability  as  to  inspire  the  confidence  of  wealthy  patrons, 
who  supplied  him  with  the  necessary  funds.  "  By  adopting  various 
inventors'  ideas  he  completed  a  series  of  machines  for  carding  and 
roving.  He  was  enabled  to  do  this  the  more  easily  by  having  the 
command  of  a  large  capital.  The  inventors  of  the  improvements 
had  not  the  means  of  carrying  them  into  effect  on  an  extensive 
scale ;  they  found  the  game,  but  from  want  of  capital  were  unable 
to  secure  it,  whilst  Mr.  Arkwright  by  availing  himself  of  their  in- 
ventions and  by  inducing  '  men  of  property  to  engage  with  him 
to  a  large  amount'  reaped  all  the  advantages  and  obtained  all  the 
rewards ; "  and  he  succeeded  in  rendering  the  ideas  of  other  men 
a  practical  success.  Roller-spinning  had  been  patented  by  Lewis 
Paul  in  1738,  but  his  rights  had  expired.  The  same  principle  was 
applied  by  Thomas  Highs  in  the  water  frame,  which  was  the 
basis  on  which  Arkwright  worked.  He  set  up  a  spinning-mill  with 
horse-power  at  Nottingham  in  1771,  and  afterwards  made  use  of 
water-power  in  his  mill  at  Cromford,  in  Derbyshire.  In  1775  he 
obtained  a  patent,  which  embraced  the  inventions  of  Lewis  Paul 
and  others.  Arkwright's  exclusive  claims  were  ignored  by  other 
manufacturers,  and  he  had  recourse  to  the  courts  to  enforce  them; 
but  finally,  in  the  action  which  he  brought  against  Colonel  Mor- 
daunt,  Arkwright  failed  to  maintain  his  alleged  rights;  and  his 
appeal  to  the  public,  entitled  The  Case  oj  Mr.  Richard  Arkwright, 
did  not  create  the  favorable  impression  he  had  expected.  There 
was  henceforth  no  hindrance  to  the  general  use  of  power-spinning. 
The  hand-jenny,  which  was  improved  from  Highs'  invention  by 


The  Industrial  Revolution  517 

Hargreave  of  Blackburn  about  1767,  had  met  with  serious  oppo- 
sition, and  it  had  hardly  been  introduced  in  the  cotton  districts 
before  it  was  superseded,  and  the  work  transferred  to  mills  where 
water-power  was  available.  A  further  invention  in  1775  byCromp- 
ton,  of  the  water  mule  which  combined  the  principles  of  the  jenny 
and  the  water  frame,  rendered  it  possible  to  obtain  a  much  finer 
thread  than  had  previously  been  produced  by  machinery,  so  that 
it  became  possible  to  develop  the  muslin  manufacture.  Through 
these  changes  the  carding,  roving,  and  spinning  of  cotton  were  no 
longer  continued  as  cottage  employments,  and  weaving  was  the  only 
part  of  the  manufacture  which  was  not  concentrated  in  factories. 
The  cotton  trade  had  a  peculiar  position  among  English  manu- 
factures ;  it  was  not  an  industry  for  which  the  country  was  naturally 
adapted,  for  the  materials  were  imported,  and  it  had  never  enjoyed 
the  protection  bestowed  on  some  other  exotic  trades,  for  there  was 
no  serious  French  competition.  The  early  history  of  the  trade  is 
very  obscure;  and  it  is  rendered  particularly  confusing  by  the 
ambiguous  use  of  the  term  cottons,  which  was  applied  in  the  six- 
teenth century  to  some  kinds  of  cloth  manufactured  from  wool. 
There  can  be  little  doubt,  however,  that  the  trade  in  Manchester 
goods,  in  which  Humphrey  Chetham  made  his  fortune,  included 
cottons  and  fustians  made  from  the  vegetable  material.  In  1641 
we  have  an  undoubted  mention  of  the  weaving  of  cotton  in  its 
modern  sense ;  Lewis  Roberts  speaks  with  admiration  of  the  enter- 
prise of  the  Manchester  men  who  bought  the  cotton  wool  of  Cyprus 
and  Smyrna  in  London  and  sold  quantities  of  fustians,  vermilions, 
and  dimities.  A  few  years  earlier,  in  1626,  we  have  an  isolated 
proposal  to  employ  the  poor  in  the  spinning  and  weaving  of  cotton 
wool;  it  seems  likely  enough  that  the  industry  was  planted  in 
Lancashire  about  1685  by  immigrants  from  Antwerp,  a  city  where 
the  fustian  manufacture  had  been  prosecuted  with  success.  But 
however  it  was  planted,  it  took  root  in  Lancashire  and  developed 
steadily  till  about  1740,  when  an  era  of  more  rapid  progress  began. 
The  competition  of  the  East  India  Company  was  that  which  the 
manufacturers  had  most  reason  to  fear,  and  though  the  cloth  they 
wove  of  cotton  on  a  linen  warp  had  a  practical  monopoly  in  the 
home  market,  they  were  liable  to  be  undersold  by  the  company  in 
foreign  markets.  Arkwright's  inventions,  by  spinning  a  firmer 
cotton  thread  than  had  hitherto  been  procurable  and  one  which 
was  suitable  for  the  warp,  made  it  possible  to  manufacture  a  cloth 
on  terms  which  rendered  it  acceptable  in  markets  in  all  parts  of 
the  world. 


518  English  Historians 

The  effect  of  Arkwright's  success  was  to  open  up  to  a  trade  that 
had  hitherto  been  conducted  on  a  small  scale  the  possibility  of 
enormous  and  indefinite  expansion.  Materials  could  be  obtained 
in  considerable  quantities  from  the  East  and  the  Bahamas;  and 
in  the  last  decades  of  the  eighteenth  century  increasing  supplies 
were  procured  from  the  Southern  States.  Since  plenty  of  raw 
material  was  available,  the  manufacture  advanced  rapidly  to  meet  the 
enlarging  demand  for  cheap  cotton  cloth.  It  is  to  be  noticed,  how- 
ever, that  the  trade  was  liable  to  serious  interruptions;  both  for 
the  materials  used,  and  for  access  to  the  markets  in  which  the  cloth 
was  sold,  the  Lancashire  manufacturers  were  dependent  on  foreign 
commerce;  and  a  breach  of  mercantile  intercourse  might  dis- 
organize the  whole  of  the  industry.  This  occurred  to  some  extent 
from  the  decline  of  the  American  demand  for  Manchester  goods 
during  the  War  of  Independence ;  as  a  result  there  was  considerable 
distress  among  the  hands  employed.  They  were  inclined  to  attrib- 
ute it  to  the  introduction  of  machinery  and  there  was  a  good  deal 
of  riotingand  destruction  of  spinning.-jennies  in  partsof  Lancashire. 
Apart  from  these  periods  of  distress,  however,  the  trade  increased 
by  leaps  and  bounds,  and  it  was  alleged  in  1806  that  a  third  part 
in  value  of  all  our  exports  was  sent  abroad  in  the  form  of  cotton 
goods. 

This  unexampled  expansion  of  the  industry  opened  up  a  very 
much  larger  field  for  employment  than  had  been  available  before 
the  era  of  these  inventions.  The  abundance  of  yarn,  especially 
after  1788,  when  mule  yarns  became  available,  was  such  that  the 
services  of  weavers  were  in  great  demand,  and  considerable  quan- 
tities of  yarn  were  sent  abroad  for  use  on  foreign  looms.  The 
kinds  of  labor  needed  were  not  very  different  from  those  required 
in  the  old  days  of  hand  spinning  and  carding;  but  girls  and  women 
were  concentrated  in  factories  to  tend  the  machines,  instead  of 
spinning  with  their  wheels  in  cottages.  This  case  affords  an  ex- 
cellent illustration  of  an  important  principle  in  regard  to  labor- 
saving  machinery;  when  the  improvement  renders  the  article 
cheaper  and  thereby  stimulates  the  demand,  it  is  quite  likely  that 
there  will  be  an  increased  call  for  labor,  because  the  machine  has 
come  into  use.  The  artisans,  who  thought  that  such  inventions 
must  necessarily  deprive  them  of  their  occupation,  were  mistaken; 
the  number  of  hands  engaged  in  the  cotton  trade  to-day  is  un- 
doubtedly much  larger  than  it  was  in  the  time  of  Arkwright.  Much 
remains  to  be  said  about  the  conditions  and  terms  of  employment; 
but  there  can  be  no  doubt  whatever  that  the  introduction  of 


The  Industrial  Revolution 

machinery  did  not  diminish  the  numbers  occupied  in  the  cotton 
trade. 

The  only  check  to  the  indefinite  expansion  of  the  trade  lay  in 
the  limited  supply  of  water-power  available ;  that  cause  for  appre- 
hension was  removed,  however,  by  the  invention  of  Boulton  and 
Watt,  and  the  application  of  steam  as  the  motive  power  in  cotton- 
mills.  Though  steam  engines  had  long  been  in  use  for  pumping 
water  from  mines,  the  improvements,  which  reduced  the  cost  of 
working  and  rendered  it  possible  to  apply  steam  power  to  industry, 
were  an  immense  advance. 

At  Papplewick,  in  Nottinghamshire,  a  steam  cotton-mill  was 
erected  in  1785;  and  the  new  power  was  utilized  for  spinning  at 
Manchester  in  1789,  and  at  Glasgow  in  1792.  Its  full  effect  was 
only  gradually  felt,  and  water  continued  to  be  economically  the 
better  agent  during  the  first  quarter  of  the  nineteenth  century;  but 
eventually  as  a  consequence  of  Watt's  invention,  water-falls  be- 
came of  less  value.  Instead  of  carrying  the  people  to  the  power, 
employers  found  it  preferable- to  place  the  power  among  the  people 
at  the  most  convenient  trading  centres.  The  factory  system  is 
older  than  the  application  of  steam  to  the  textile  trades;  but  the 
introduction  of  the  new  mechanical  power  tended  to  destroy  the 
advantage  of  factory  villages  on  streams,  and  rendered  possible 
the  gradual  concentration  of  the  population  in  factory  towns. 

The  cotton  trade,  as  depending  on  imported  materials  and  sup- 
plying foreign  markets,  was  probably  a  capitalistic  trade  from  the 
very  first ;  the  suggestion  that  it  was  planted  by  immigration  from 
abroad  harmonizes  with  this  view,  and  though  the  weavers  were 
cottagers,  it  is  likely  that  they  were  wage-earners  and  not  men  who 
worked  on  the  domestic  system.  However  this  may  be,  the  manu- 
facture was  organized  on  capitalistic  lines  from  the  time  of  the 
introduction  of  machinery,  and  the  cotton  factories  which  rose 
in  the  neighborhood  of  Manchester  and  other  large  towns  soon 
began  to  attract  public  attention.1 

1  For  full  bibliography,  consult  Cunningham,  op.  cit.,  pp.  943  ff. 


CHAPTER   V 

THE  CONTINENTAL  SYSTEM 

PATRIOTISM,  political  partisanship,  and  religious  opinions  have 
greatly  obscured  the  real  issues  at  stake  in  the  long  wars  which 
England  waged  with  France  from  1793  to  1815.  To  get  at  the 
forces  which  brought  on  and  continued  this  contest,  it  is  not 
enough  to  study  the  diplomatic  negotiations  immediately  preced- 
ing the  outbreak  of  the  war;  one  must  turn  to  the  history  of  the 
two  centuries  of  conflict,  armed  and  peaceful,  prior  to  the  Revolu- 
tion ;  one  must  examine  the  distribution  of  colonial  and  commercial 
interests  in  the  various  parts  of  the  world;  and  finally,  one  must 
study  the  internal  economic  conditions  of  France  and  England. 
Unfortunately  we  have  in  English  no  book  on  these  particular 
aspects,  but  Professor  Sloane  in  the  following  article  has  given  a 
balanced  though  short  account  of  the  main  forces  at  work. 

§  i.  Commercial  Position  of  England  at  the  Outbreak  of  the 
French  War l 

The  phrase  "a  nation  of  shopkeepers"  was  used  to  stigmatize 
the  English  by  Samuel  Adams  in  the  Independent  Advertiser  as 
early  as  1748.  It  expressed  the  feelings  of  the  English  in  America 
toward  the  English  in  England  with  perfect  accuracy,  and  was 
destined  to  become  a  winged  word  throughout  Europe.  The 
Seven  Years'  War  was  a  struggle  for  commercial  supremacy 
which  made  England  in  a  new  sense  the  arbiter  of  the  world's 
commerce.  The  American  Revolution  began  ostensibly,  at  least, 
in  certain  questions  of  trade,  taxation,  and  representation,  and 
the  fundamental  question  of  racial  and  institutional  development, 
which  bore  much  the  same  relation  to  the  struggle  as  that  of 

1  Reprinted  from  the  Political  Science  Quarterly,  Vol.  XIII,  pp.  213  ff. 
By  permission  of  Professor  Sloane  and  Ginn  &  Company,  Publishers. 

520 


The  Continental  System  521 

slavery  bore  to  our  Civil  War,  did  not  appear  until  at  its  close. 
Again,  the  French  Revolution  was  apparently  concerned  at  first 
with  matters  of  internal  finance  and  taxation ;  but  before  the  close 
it  was  plain  to  every  observer  that  the  relation  of  the  new  republic 
to  the  balance  of  political  and  economic  power  throughout  Europe 
was  the  question  on  which  hung  its  stability. 

Politically,  England  had  suffered  a  reverse  in  our  Revolution,  but 
she  had  managed  to  retain  her  control  of  American  commerce. 
In  the  year  1783  she  was  distinctly  stronger  than  any  other  land, 
not  even  excepting  France.  On  the  outbreak  of  the  Continental 
Revolution  she  had  everything  to  win  or  lose  in  the  decision  as  to 
what  influence  should  preponderate  on  the  globe  at  the  close  of 
the  epoch  which  she  had  inaugurated  in  her  own  Revolution  of 
1688.  The  armed  peace  which  lasted  until  1793  was  therefore  a 
pregnant  time  in  the  field  of  political  and  economic  speculation  — 
a  period  in  which  the  wealth  of  England  was  the  cynosure  of  all 
eyes  and  the  universal  topic  of  discussion.  Yet  the  conclusion 
reached  in  France  was  that  expressed  by  Kersaint  in  his  speech 
before  the  Convention  on  January  13,  1793,  "The  credit  of  Eng- 
land rests  on  a  fictitious  wealth." 

This  and  a  similar  statement  by  Brissot  represented  the  view 
of  the  extreme  Radical  party.  At  the  beginning  of  the  discussion 
there  had  been  many  opinions.  Pitt's  commercial  treaty  with 
France  of  1786  was  highly  favorable  to  the  wine  growers  of  the 
south  and  to  such  manufacturers  of  the  west  and  centre  as  did  not 
directly  compete  with  those  of  England  ;  accordingly  it  was  popular 
in  thore  regions.  But  in  the  north,  where  the  industrial  and  com- 
mercial interests  were  in  direct  competition  with  those  of  Great 
Britain,  the  treaty  was  regarded  with  detestation,  as  preliminary  to 
the  further  development  of  a  deep-laid  plot  to  annihilate  French 
trade.  With  the  march  of  political  events  this  feeling  spread, 
and  France,  from  being  a  land  guided  by  free-traders,  went  to  the 
opposite  extreme  and  became  strongly  protectionist.  Reviving 
the  commercial  policy  of  the  old  regime,  the  republic  outran 
the  zeal  of  the  monarchy.  Such,  according  to  our  best  authority, 
Mollien,  was  the  condition  of  public  opinion  when  Bonaparte 
took  charge  in  1800. 

§  2.   French  Protective  Policy  and  Bonaparte 

It  is  needless  to  say  that  a  man  like  the  First  Consul,  who  was  a 
suitor  for  public  favor,  made  the  universal  jealousy  of  England's 


522  English  Historians 

commercial  supremacy  in  a  special  and  peculiar  sense  his  fore- 
most care.  But  that  Bonaparte  did  not  originate  the  high  pro- 
tection policy  of  France  is  proved  by  the  remarkable  enactment 
known  as  the  Lot  de  10  Brumaire,  An  V  (October  31,  1796). 
This  drastic  measure  forbade  the  importation  of  all  manufactured 
articles,  either  made  in  England  or  passing  through  the  channels 
of  English  trade  by  land  or  sea,  except  under  certain  stringent  and 
exceptional  regulations  as  to  trans-shipment,  and  ordered  the  con- 
fiscation of  such  articles  if  found  in  a  French  port  on  any  vessel 
whatsoever.  The  carefully  prepared  list  of  the  articles  of  English 
manufacture  thus  to  be  shut  out  included  everything  in  the  pro- 
duction of  which  the  expansion  of  English  manufactures  at  the 
close  of  the  last  century  made  Great  Britain  super-eminent,— 
products  of  the  loom,  the  forge,  the  tannery,  the  glass  house,  the 
sugar  refinery,  and  the  potter's  kiln.  Fourteen  concluding  articles 
of  the  law  enacted  a  system  of  trade  control  whereby,  to  all  ap- 
pearance, the  evasion  of  either  the  letter  or  spirit  of  the  law  was 
made  impossible. 

Yet  for  a  time  the  disintegration  of  the  public  powers  under 
the  Directory  was  such  that  in  spite  of  "the  exasperation  of  the 
national  hatred  against  the  English  government,"  the  law  was 
simply  ignored.  On  December  4,  1798,  however,  there  was  a 
sudden  change ;  without  warning,  strong  military  detachments 
were  placed  at  the  gates  of  Paris  and  every  vehicle  was  searched 
carefully,  domiciliary  visits  were  commenced  by  the  customs  au- 
thorities and  were  continued  until  all  English  wares  were  removed 
from  commerce,  and  French  public  opinion  supported  these  pro- 
ceedings, which  the  English  stigmatized  as  "legal  robbery."  The 
fact  was  that  Napoleon  Bonaparte  had  temporarily  taken  up  the 
task  of  administration,  and,  having  correctly  read  the  public 
temper,  was  beginning  the  policy  of  "thorough."  The  treaty  of 
Campio  Formio  had  been  concluded;  and  though  he  was  only 
commander-in-chief  of  the  French  army  —  and  that  by  construc- 
tion rather  than  in  form  —  he  was  really  the  arbiter  of  the  gov- 
ernment. Whatever  the  masses  thought,  the  Directory  knew  that 
the  fate  of  France  was  in  his  hands;  and  nothing  confirmed  that 
opinion  more  strongly  than  the  ease  with  which  the  law  enacted 
two  years  before  was  now  enforced.  Having  made  what  he  con- 
sidered easy  terms  with  Austria,  he  had  determined  to  destroy  the 
credit  of  Pitt's  government  by  attacking  English  industries  and 
commerce,  and,  to  defy,  if  necessary,  the  neutral  carriers  of  the 
world.  It  appears  to  have  been  at  this  time  that  his  mind  formed 


The  Continental  System  523 

the  "Chimaera,"  as  a  French  historian  calls  it,  which  in  the  end 
proved  his  ruin  —  the  conception  that,  if  only  the  conservative 
administration  of  Great  Britain  could  be  discredited,  the  Whigs 
would  adhere  to  "the  republican  peace." 

The  time  was  not  ripe  for  any  attack  on  England  more  direct 
than  this;  and  to  occupy  the  interval  until  it  might  become  so, 
the  well-worn  scheme  of  harassing  her  at  her  extremities  was 
revived.  The  uneasy  Bonaparte  was  temporarily  removed  from 
the  scene  of  the  administration  by  the  Egyptian  expedition,  in- 
tended at  least  to  menace  English  commerce  in  those  distant  parts 
of  the  earth  if  not  to  work  the  complete  ruin  of  her  Oriental  em- 
pire. But  if  the  time  was  not  ripe  to  engage  in  active  hostilities 
for  the  enforcement  of  an  economic  doctrine,  this  fact  was  not  due 
to  any  absence  of  such  doctrine,  formulated  and  avowed. 

§  3.    The  Theory  0}  Protection  and  Exclusion 

The  theory  of  a  closed  jural  state,  which  had  been  evolved  in 
defence  of  the  final  stage  in  the  formation  of  European  nationality, 
was  itself  undergoing  an  expansion  in  the  direction  of  expounding 
the  international  relations  of  States  in  commercial  affairs.  In  1801 
Fichte  published  his  famous  treatise  entitled  The  Closed  Com- 
mercial State,  his  contribution  to  the  literature  of  Utopias.  De- 
fining the  jural  State  as  a  limited  body  of  men  subject  to  the  same 
laws  and  to  the  same  coactive  sovereignty,  he  declared  that  the 
same  body  of  men  ought  to  be  stringently  limited  to  like  reciprocity 
of  coirmerce  and  industry,  and  that  any  one  not  under  the  same 
legislative  power  and  the  same  coactive  force  should  be  excluded 
from  participation  in  this  relation ;  thus  would  be  formed  a  closed 
commercial  State  parallel  to  the  closed  jural  State.  His  treatise 
was  divided  into  three  books  entitled,  respectively,  Philosophy, 
Contemporary  History,  and  Politics,  preceded  by  an  introduction 
discussing  the  relation  of  the  rational  State  to  the  real,  and  of  pure 
public  law  to  politics.  The  first  book  was  merely  an  elaboration 
of  his  idea  as  to  what  is  just  and  right  within  the  rational  State, 
in  view  of  trade  relations  as  they  are;  in  the  second  book  he  pro- 
ceeded to  discuss  the  actual  condition  of  commercial  intercourse 
in  the  existing  States ;  and  in  the  third  book  he  considered  how  the 
theory  of  a  closed  commercial  State  was  to  be  realized.  The  vital 
portion  of  his  argument  lay  in  the  statement  that  if  all  Christian 
Europe,  with  its  colonies  and  factories  in  other  quarters  of  the 
globe,  was  to  be  considered  as  a  whole,  trade  must  remain  free  as  it 


524  English   Historians 

once  was;  if,  however,  it  was  to  be  divided  into  several  wholes 
each  under  its  own  government,  it  must  likewise  be  divided  into 
several  entirely  closed  commercial  States.  Said  .he:  — 

"  Those  systems  which  demand  free  trade,  those  claims  to  the 
right  to  buy  and  sell  freely  in  the  whole  known  world,  have  been 
handed  down  to  us  from  among  the  ideas  of  our  ancestors,  for 
whom  they  were  suited;  we  took  them  without  examination  and 
adopted  them,  and  it  is  with  trouble  that  we  substitute  others  for 
them." 

Seven  years  later  the  same  philosopher  declared,  in  his  better- 
known  Address  to  the  German  Nation,  that  the  much-vaunted 
liberty  of  the  seas  was  a  matter  entirely  indifferent  to  the  Ger- 
mans. For  the  preservation  of  their  peculiar  genius,  he  argued, 
they  should  be  saved  from  all  participation,  direct  or  indirect, 
in  the  wealth  of  other  people;  otherwise  the  curse  of  commer- 
cialism would  overtake  them. 

Thus  the  "idealogues"  of  Europe,  German  and  French,  held 
identical  opinions.  They  appear  to  have  had  multitudes  of  sup- 
porters in  all  lands.  At  any  rate,  it  is  idle  to  charge  Bonaparte 
with  being  the  inventor  of  the  rigid  protectionist  doctrines  that  he 
endeavored  to  apply  to  the  dominions  which,  when  acquired  by 
conquest,  he  intended  to  incorporate  in  a  European  empire  hav- 
ing its  capital  and  administrative  seat  at  Paris.  They  were  held 
by  the  men  of  the  Terror  in  1793,  by  the  Directory  in  1796,  by  the 
overwhelming  majority  of  the  French  people  in  1798,  and  by  a 
respectable  number  of  Germans  and  of  Americans  in  the  years 
immediately  succeeding;  while  they  are  still  held  by  immense  num- 
bers of  those  in  whom  the  idea  of  nationality  preponderates  over 
all  other  political  concepts. 

§  4.   Economic  Situation  at  the  Truce  of  Amiens 

The  Berlin  Decree,  which  is  generally  considered  to  have  in- 
augurated the  Continental  System  in  form,  is,  in  fact,  antedated 
by  the  Orders  in  Council  of  Great  Britain.  During  1801  English 
commerce  was  considerably  greater  than  it  was  during  1802,  the 
year  of  nominal  peace;  and  this  was  due,  of  course,  to  the  fact 
that  the  commercial  warfare  was  not  even  nominally  discontinued. 
The  real  trouble  felt  by  Lord  Whitworth,  the  British  ambassador 
at  Paris,  was  that  the  existing  commercial  situation  of  his  country 
was  intolerable,  and  that  he  must  find  some  casus  belli  in  order  to 
end  it.  It  is  well  known  that  he  fixed  on  a  very  trivial  pretext,  — 


The   Continental  System  525 

the  conduct  of  Bonaparte  at  a  public  reception  in  the  Tuileries, 
and  that  Great  Britain  had  much  difficulty  in  making  the  flimsy 
excuse  appear  important.  The  fact  was  that  the  First  Consul  was 
using  the  peace  to  extend  the  protective  system  of  France  over  all 
the  lands  which  he  had  conquered  in  Northern  and  Central  Italy 
and  to  force  Holland  and  Switzerland  into  his  customs  union.  In 
consequence  English  commerce  was  suffering,  and  the  mission  of 
Sebastiani  into  the  Orient  made  it  seem  highly  probable  to  Eng- 
lish merchants  that  the  process  of  further  diminishing  their  trade 
was  already  under  way  in  those  distant  parts.  The  publication 
of  Sebastiani's  report  was  the  last  straw  in  the  burden  of  the 
British  merchants,  and  they  refused  to  carry  the  load  any  longer. 
Bonaparte  said  that  the  independence  of  a  nation  carried  with  it 
the  absolute  control  of  its  trade,  and  that  if  Great  Britain  intended 
to  keep  both  Gibraltar  and  Malta,  she  virtually  announced  by 
that  fact  her  determination  to  unite  the  commerce  of  the  Indies, 
the  Mediterranean,  and  the  Baltic  in  a  single  system  controlled  by 
herself,  which  would  create  a  situation  intolerable  and  impossible. 
The  peace  of  Amiens  was  merely  a  truce,  and  the  only  question 
as  to  its  duration  was  one  of  reciprocal  forbearance  and  endurance. 
As  soon  as  it  became  clear  that  neither  England  nor  France  would 
abandon  the  idea  of  commercial  supremacy,  the  vital  matter  of 
policy  on  both  sides  was  how  to  re-open  the  war.  To  do  this  was 
to  assume  a  fearful  burden  of  responsibility.  History  is  still  striv- 
ing to  determine  who  gave  the  immediate  impulse;  for  whoever 
did  give  it  is  held  responsible  for  the  appalling  bloodshed  of  the 
Napoleonic  as  distinguished  from  the  Republican  wars.  To-day 
even  the  English  historians  of  the  most  enlightened  sort  admit 
that  France  was  tricked  into  the  declaration  of  war.  The  coalition 
was  in  process  of  formation  within  a  few  days  after  the  ink  was  dry 
on  the  treaty  of  Campo  Formio ;  it  was  in  readiness  when  hostili- 
ties broke  out;  and  the  fuel  necessary  to  make  the  intermittent 
flickering  flames  burst  forth  anew  was  supplied  by  the  successive 
Orders  in  Council. 

§  5.   An  English  Argument  for  the  Destruction  0}  France 

In  1805  there  was  printed  in  London  and  published  anony- 
mously a  book  which  is  now  believed  to  have  been  officially  in- 
spired. It  was  actually  written  by  James  Stephen,  and  the  title 
was  War  in  Disguise,  or  the  Frauds  o/  the  Neutral  Flag.  Its 
argument  was  the  need  of  the  destruction  of  France  to  prevent 


526  English  Historians 

the  ruin  of  England.  The  immediate  dilemma  considered  was  the 
sacrifice  of  Great  Britain's  maritime  rights  or  a  quarrel  with  the 
neutral  powers.  The  author  thought  that  the  system  of  licenses 

—  "salt  water  indulgences,"  he  called  them  —  was  shaking  Eng- 
land's supremacy  exactly  as  the  papal  indulgences  of  the  fifteenth 
century  had  shaken  the  Roman  supremacy.     In  attacking  neutral 
trade,  he  thought  there  was  little  danger  of  provoking  hostilities 
or  evoking  reprisals.     As  to  America,  particularly,  a  non-importa- 
tion policy  on  her  part  would  injure  herself  alone.     She  was  far 
too  honorable  to  confiscate  the  property  of  English  merchants 
within  her  borders,  and  far  too  shrewd  to  expose  to  retributive 
seizure  the  enormous  commerce  which   she  herself  had  afloat. 
Suppose,  however,  he  continued,  that  neither  the  sacrifice  of  mari- 
time rights  nor  the  quarrel  with  neutral  powers  be  accepted,  there 
remains  still  a  third  possibility,  —  to  admit  the  pretension  that 
"free  ships  make  free  goods,"  to  suspend  the  navigation  laws,  and 
then  to  seize  all  the  benefits  of  neutral  carriers.     "Let  brooms  be 
put  at  the  mastheads  of  all  our  merchantmen,  and  their  seamen 
be  sent  to  the  fleets."     This,  he  argued,  would  be  a  less  evil  than 
that  under  which  English  commerce  was  suffering,  unless,  indeed, 
all  parties,  including  the  enemy,  would  abjure  the  right  of  capturing 
merchant  ships  of  private  effects  of  an  enemy  —  a   visionary 
means  of  reconciling  naval  war  with  commercial  peace.     Such 
general  abjuration  was  impossible,  and  there  remained  no  remedy 
for  England's  ills  save  peace  with  Bonaparte.     But  the  mere  sug- 
gestion of  this  action  was  preposterous.     The  insuperable  bar- 
rier was   the   British   constitution.     Austria   and   Russia   might 
make  peace  with  a  military  despot;  but  with  a  man  who  employed 
the  leisure  of  peace  for  no  other  purpose  than  to  enslave  the  smaller 
powers  of  the  Continent  no  peace  was  possible  for  a  free  country 
like  England,  except  such  a  one  as  would  be  equivalent  to  abso- 
lute surrender.     As  might  have  been  expected,  the  Englishman 
who  wrote  War  in  Disguise  concluded  his  argument  with  a  pious 
appeal  to  the  Almighty,  obedience  to  whose  righteous  laws  is  the 
soundest  political  wisdom,  and  who  wills  not  only  the  end,  but 
the  means  —  in  this  case  "volunteers,  navy,  and  maritime  rights." 
This  temper  for  war  to  the  bitter  end  was  quite  as  strong  in  France 
as  in  England;    and  while  the  English  appealed  to  God  and 
righteousness,  it  was  equally  characteristic  that  the  French  were 
at  the  same  time  exploiting  a  parallel  drawn  from  classical  history 

—  that  of  Rome  and  Carthage. 


The  Continental  System  527 


§  6.   Napoleon  and  Commercial  Imperialism 

The  Grand  Army  of  England,  assembled  by  Bonaparte  at 
Boulogne,  was  a  two-edged  weapon.  Napoleon  told  Metternich 
that  he  always  intended  to  use  it  against  Austria,  as  he  actually 
did  use  it;  but  he  told  the  captain  of  the  Northumberland,  on 
August  15,  1815,  that  he  had  intended  the  invasion  seriously,  ex- 
pecting to  land  as  near  London  as  possible.  Although  these 
antipodal  statements  were  clearly  intended  to  flatter  the  national 
pride  of  the  respective  dignitaries  to  whom  they  were  addressed, 
yet,  paradoxical  as  the  assertion  seems,  when  taken  together  they 
express  the  exact  truth:  successful  invasion  would  have  involved 
the  immediate  overthrow  of  British  power;  while  protective  ex- 
clusion and  the  destruction  of  the  coalition  was  the  slower,  per- 
haps, but  the  more  certain  of  the  two  ways.  The  latter  was 
probably  the  intention  toward  which  Napoleon  leaned  most  seri- 
ously. By  compelling  the  British  to  maintain  a  costly  war  es- 
tablishment, the  great  schemer  would  exhaust  their  by  no  means 
bottomless  purse  and  thus  would  be  able  to  cripple  the  equip- 
ment of  the  coalition,  to  expand  by  victory  the  territorial  empire 
of  France,  and  to  open  the  way  for  her  enterprise  to  the  eastward. 
Finally,  Napoleon  made  no  serious  effort  toward  the  "Descent," 
using  the  notion  to  extort  war  funds  from  the  French  exactly  as  the 
Jacobins  and  the  Directory  had  done;  and  the  actual  fact  of  the 
magnificent  countermarch  toward  Vienna  and  the  results  of  Auster- 
litz  ought  to  convince  us  that,  while  at  times  he  did  contemplate 
invading  England,  his  mind  was  on  the  whole  directed  toward  the 
course  he  actually  pursued,  —  that  of  striking  at  the  coalition  through 
Austria. 

The  extension  of  the  protective  system  beyond  France  and  the 
countries  immediately  under  her  control  began  in  1803,  when 
Spain  was  admonished  to  observe  it  or  take  the  consequences; 
immediately  after  Austerlitz,  Istria,  and  Dalmatia  were  included 
in  the  system.  When,  thereupon,  Prussia  was  requested  to  in- 
clude the  North  Sea  coasts  in  its  operation,  as  the  price  for  the 
occupation  of  Hanover,  Great  Britain  retorted  by  her  Orders  in 
Council,  declaring  the  shore  line  from  the  mouth  of  the  Elbe  all 
the  way  around  as  far  as  Brest  to  be  in  a  state  of  blockade.  Prussia 
chose  to  accept  neither  the  terms  of  Great  Britain  nor  those  of 
France,  and  struggled  to  remain  neutral  —  a  sheer  impossibility ; 
the  Czar  of  Russia  then  repudiated  the  treaty  into  which  his 


528  English  Historians 

ambassador,  D'Oubril,  had  been  drawn  by  the  wiles  of  Talleyrand ; 
in  due  course  of  time  followed  Jena  and  Friedland,  and  at  last  the 
way  was  clear  for  turning  a  protective  system  hitherto  more  or  less 
local  into  one  which  could  be  more  or  less  Continental.  The 
Berlin  Decree  was  the  longest  step  possible  after  Jena;  while  the 
Milan  Decree  was  the  natural  sequence  or  the  enlarged  oppor- 
tunity which  the  Peace  of  Tilsit  gave  for  pursuing  the  same  old 
economic  policy. 

§  7.    The  Berlin  Decree  and  Montgaillard's  Scheme 

In  justification  of  his  course,  Napoleon  pleaded  the  moderation 
he  had  shown  in  dealing  with  the  enemy  after  the  three  first  coali- 
tions, and  declared  in  his  message  to  the  Senate  that  he  desired 
such  a  general  European  peace  as  would  guarantee  the  prosperity, 
not  of  England  alone,  but  of  all  the  Continental  powers;  but  as 
the  attitude  of  the  enemy  rendered  this  impossible,  nothing  re- 
mained but  to  adopt  measures  "which  were  repugnant  to  his 
heart."  The  Berlin  Decree  set  forth  in  its  preamble  that  Eng- 
land paid  no  respect  to  international  law;  that  she  considered  as 
enemies,  not  alone  the  organized  war  power  of  hostile  states,  but 
the  persons  and  vessels  of  their  citizens  engaged  in  commerce,  tak- 
ing the  persons  prisoners  of  war  and  the  ships  as  prizes ;  that  she 
extended  the  principle  of  blockade  to  unfortified  towns,  harbors, 
and  river  mouths,  declaring  places  to  be  blockaded  before  which 
there  were  no  forces  sufficient  to  enforce  the  blockade,  and  ex- 
tending this  absurdity  to  the  coast  lines  of  entire  empires;  that, 
finally,  since  this  conduct  had  no  other  intention  than  the  ruin  of 
all  Europe  to  the  advantage  of  English  trade,  "We  have  resolved 
to  apply  to  England  the  usages  which  she  has  sanctioned  in  her 
maritime  legislation."  The  principles  of  the  decree  were  asserted 
to  be  valid  just  as  long  as  England  should  not  admit  the  validity 
in  maritime  war  of  the  principles  which  control  war  by  land ;  the 
laws  of  war  cannot  be  applied,  either  to  private  property,  whatever 
it  may  be,  or  to  the  persons  of  those  who  are  not  belligerents,  and 
the  right  of  blockade  must  be  confined  in  its  application  to  strong 
places  really  invested  by  sufficient  forces.  The  British  Isles  were 
then  declared  in  a  state  of  blockade,  and  all  the  rigors  of  the  Eng- 
lish system  were  ordered  to  be  carried  out  in  detail.  Finally, 
notification  in  due  form  was  given  to  the  kings  of  Spain,  Naples, 
Holland,  and  Etruria,  and  to  all  Napoleon's  allies  whose  citizens 
were  suffering  from  the  "  barbarities  of  English  maritime  legis- 
lation.- 


The  Continental  System  529 

The  date  of  the  Berlin  Decree  was  November  21,  1806.  On 
July  25,  1805,  Montgaillard,  a  clever  scoundrel,  —  of  whom,  as 
Napoleon  remarked,  something  could  have  been  made  if  he  had 
not  been  fit  for  hanging,  —  wrote  a  memorial  which  was  pre- 
sented to  Napoleon  and  is  claimed  to  have  been  the  basis  of  the 
Continental  System.  As  expanded  on  March  24,  1806,  this  paper 
represents  that  England  has  in  view  the  sole  object  of  destroying 
the  French  marine  in  order  to  destroy  French  commerce,  and  that, 
consequently,  the  imperial  idea  of  Europe  is  one  to  which  she  can 
never  accede  even  by  a  temporary  peace ;  that  she  will  never  re- 
nounce her  claim  to  Hanover  or  permit  the  occupation  of  Holland, 
her  ultimate  intention  being  to  establish  in  Egypt  a  station  to  pro- 
tect her  commerce  by  the  Red  Sea  with  India.  Portugal,  which 
will  always  side  with  England,  must,  therefore,  be  incorporated 
with  Spain;  while  Crete  and  Egypt  must  be  occupied  by  both 
military  and  commercial  posts.  The  influence  of  England's  deep, 
fierce  hostility,  it  continues,  is  seen  in  the  refusal  of  both  Austria 
and  Russia  to  recognize  the  newly  created  vassal  kingdom  of 
Italy.  England  arrogated  the  tyranny  of  the  seas  in  1651  by  the 
Navigation  Act  passed  under  the  Protector ;  her  very  existence  is 
founded  in  traffic  and  commerce,  and  without  it  there  is  no  move- 
ment in  her  body  politic.  She  is  forced  to  disregard  all  provi- 
sions of  international  law  which  tend  to  diminish  her  commercial 
strength.  William  of  Orange  created  her  national  debt ;  and  suc- 
cessive sovereigns  have  in  their  various  Continental  and  American 
wars  increased  it  to  its  present  dimensions  —  estimated  at  about 
six  hundred  millions  sterling.  To  carry  this  enormous  obliga- 
tion and  emit  the  new  loans  necessary  to  sustain  the  respective 
coalitions,  it  is  essential  that  her  commerce  should  continuously 
expand. 

"  It  is  through  her  commerce  that  England  must  be  attacked 
[says  Montgaillard];  to  leave  her  all  her  gains  in  Europe,  Asia,  and 
America  is  to  leave  her  all  her  arms,  to  render  conflicts  and  wars 
eternal.  To  destroy  British  commerce  is  to  strike  England  to  the 
heart." 

He  then  advances  the  idea  which  appears  to  be  the  germ  of  the 
Continental  System:  Since  Russia  seems  to  favor  the  plans  of 
England,  and  since  Sweden  is  destitute  of  both  independence  and 
dignity,  France  must  begin  the  attack  on  the  maritime  legislation 
of  the  enemy.  She  has  only  to  make  the  navigation  acts  her  own, 
modify  them  in  favor  of  the  powers  which  accept  them,  and  adopt 
a  policy  of  reciprocity. 


530  English  Historians 


§  8.   The  Flaw  in  Napoleon's  Reasoning 

How  far  these  councils  influenced  Napoleon  it  is  impossible  to 
say;  but  the  chronological  coincidence  has  some  value  in  sup- 
port of  the  claim  that  Montgaillard  at  least  gave  the  final  impulse 
to  the  Emperor.  There  seems,  however,  to  have  been  a  fatal  flaw 
in  the  reasoning  of  both.  As  the  latest  Italian  commentator  has 
remarked,  there  was  no  symptom  in  either  executive  or  counsellor 
of  any  grasp  upon  the  fact  that  by  the  amazing  development  of 
industry  in  England  the  wealth  of  the  entire  world  had  been 
enormously  increased  —  so  enormously  that  without  a  correspond- 
ing increase  in  other  nations  no  international  rivalry  in  prosperity 
and  influence  was  at  all  possible.  It  was  then,  as  indeed  it  is 
still,  generally  supposed  that  England  had  reached  her  eminence 
in  commerce  by  a  series  of  flagrant  wrongs ;  and  when  the  succes- 
sive steps  of  aggression  and  reprisal  are  chronologically  arranged, 
there  is  a  superficial  appearance  of  truth  in  the  charge.  The 
Orders  in  Council  were  iniquitous  anachronisms,  and  they  gave 
a  color  of  justification  to  the  equally  barbarous  decrees  of  France 
—  decrees  in  themselves  preposterous,  and  supported,  moreover, 
by  a  blockade  which  was  as  purely  fictitious  as  that  by  which  Great 
Britain  supported  her  Orders  in  Council.  The  original  sketch 
of  the  Berlin  Decree  has  been  recently  discovered  in  the 
archives  at  Paris,  and  it  is  very  important  to  note  that  it  does  not 
contemplate  that  portion  of  the  completed  document  which  covers 
the  lands  either  allied  to  or  under  the  influence  of  France;  this 
provision  seems  to  have  been  added  after  long  reflection.  The 
natural  complement  of  a  fictitious  blockade  was  a  fictitious  pro- 
tective system;  the  one  was  as  absurd  as  the  other. 

§  9.   Extension  0}  Retaliation  and  Exclusion 

In  her  puzzled  uncertainty,  and  under  the  stress  of  necessity 
for  immediate  action  of  some  kind,  England  took  the  next  false 
step  in  the  same  direction  and  issued  the  Orders  of  January  7, 
1807,  declaring  all  the  ports,  not  only  of  France,  but  of  her  colonies, 
in  a  state  of  blockade  and  throwing  down  the  gauntlet  to  the 
neutral  States  by  forbidding  any  ship  to  trade  between  the  ports  of 
France,  of  her  colonies,  and  of  the  countries  in  the  French  system ; 
while  on  November  1 1  a  new  decree  extended  the  inhibition  to  all 
ports  whatsoever  from  which  the  English  flag  was  excluded.  This 


The  Continental  System  531 

extreme  position  was  pronounced  by  Lord  Erskine  to  be  uncon- 
stitutional and  contrary  to  the  law  of  nations.  That  it  was  not 
intended  to  be  enforced,  but  was  to  be  used  as  a  pretext  to  secure 
maritime  monopoly  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  already,  in  the 
month  before,  Great  Britain  had  inaugurated  the  policy  of  evad- 
ing her  own  decrees,  raising  the  blockade  of  both  the  Elbe  and  the 
Weser,  and  winking  at  the  contraband  trade  which  immediately 
sprang  up  in  consequence.  Napoleon  was  therefore  untiring  in 
the  system  of  reprisals ;  on  November  23  of  the  same  year  he  issued 
the  Milan  Decree  as  a  retort  both  to  the  scheme  of  contraband 
trade  put  into  operation  at  Bremen  and  Hamburg  and  to  the 
Orders  of  November  1 1 ;  and  to  supplement  this,  a  second  and 
more  rigorous  decree  was  promulgated  on  December  26,  1807. 
Any  vessel  which  had  suffered  the  visitation  of  English  cruisers 
or  had  put  in  at  an  English  port  was  declared  thereby  to  have 
become  English  and  consequently  subject  to  confiscation;  an 
embargo  was  also  placed  on  all  neutral  ships  at  that  time  in  French 
harbors.  Prussia,  Sweden,  and  Denmark  adhered  promptly  to 
the  new  Continental  System.  England  was  terrified  at  the  con- 
sequences of  its  own  temerity,  and  on  April  26,  1809,  modified  her 
orders  by  limiting  the  blockade  to  "all  the  ports  of  the  so-called 
kingdom  of  Holland,  of  France  and  her  colonies,  and  of  Southern 
Italy  from  Orbetello  to  Pesaro  inclusive."  Yet,  for  all  this, 
Austria  and  Switzerland  gave  in  their  adhesion  somewhat  later; 
while  America  stuck  to  the  principle  of  non-intercourse  and  finally 
obtained  the  revocation  in  her  favor  of  both  the  Berlin  and  the 
Milan  Decrees  and,  in  the  end,  of  the  Orders  in  Council.  As  is 
well  knwn,  public  necessity  proved  to  be  stronger  than  theory; 
Napoleon's  very  energy  in  depriving  Continental  Europe  of  colonial 
and  English-made  articles  which,  once  regarded  as  luxuries,  had 
in  time  become  necessities,  together  with  the  consequent  exas- 
peration of  Great  Britain  at  the  diminution  of  her  trade,  was  one 
of  the  bonds  which  combined  the  most  discordant  political  ele- 
ments into  a  union  for  the  destruction  of  French  empire. 

§  10.    The  Legal  Argument  in  Justification  of  English  Policy 

The  English  side  of  the  secular  controversy  which  has  raged 
over  the  right  and  wrong  of  the  Continental  System  has  been  pre- 
sented by  various  writers  with  great  ingenuity  and  acumen.  The 
seizure  of  private  persons  and  property  on  the  high  seas,  runs  their 
argument,  was  simply  the  retort  to  the  French  decree  of  1798 


53 2  English  Historians 

which  ordered  the  execution  of  all  neutral  sailors  found  on  Eng- 
lish ships;  the  French  had  been  the  first  to  disregard  the  law  of 
nations  in  seizing  the  property  of  English  merchants  on  terra 
firma  at  Leghorn,  and  from  times  immemorial  the  usage  of  Europe 
had  authorized  the  seizure  of  private  property  on  the  high  seas; 
the  paper  blockade,  though  illegal  and  absurd,  was  resorted  to 
under  great  provocation,  because  Prussia  had  occupied  Hanover, 
a  territory  which  belonged,  if  not  to  England,  at  least  to  the  holder 
of  the  English  crown.  It  follows,  therefore,  that  every  measure 
taken  by  England  was  strictly  in  the  nature  of  a  reprisal.  This 
legal  plea  is  a  question  to  be  considered  by  jurisprudence,  partly 
in  the  light  of  the  changing  identity  of  France  and  partly  in  that  ot 
variations  of  obligation  due  to  the  incidents  of  warfare  —  such,  for 
example,  as  the  conduct  of  England  at  Copenhagen,  which  was 
only  the  culmination  of  a  series  of  similar  acts  in  the  treatment 
of  neutrals.  It  seems  very  doubtful  whether  any  legal  argument 
can  avail  much  in  explaining  the  inconsistencies  incident  to  such 
struggles  as  the  wars  which  were  waged  during  the  Napoleonic 
epoch. 

§  ii.   Economic  Justification  o/  English  Policy 

The  real  and  paramount  plea  of  England  is  self-defence;  the 
arguments  based  on  the  political  and  economic  emergencies  in 
which  she  was  involved,  in  consequence  of  her  amazing  constitu- 
tional and  industrial  preeminence,  have  a  validity  far  beyond  any 
which  inheres  in  pleas  that  are  purely  technical,  and  confined  at 
that  to  the  field  of  international  law. 

Certain  facts  recently  noted  by  Rose,  the  well-known  Cam- 
bridge historian,  throw  a  flood  of  light  on  the  miraculous  develop- 
ment of  English  and  Scotch  industry  during  the  Napoleonic  epoch. 
Robert  Owen  stated,  and  in  all  sobriety,  that  in  1816  his  two  thou- 
sand operatives  at  New  Lanark  accomplished  with  the  aid  of  the 
new  machinery  as  much  as  had  been  accomplished  by  all  the  oper- 
atives in  Scotland  without  it !  In  his  autobiography,  Owen  further 
emphasizes  the  extent  of  the  industrial  revolution  by  estimating 
—  and  the  estimate  is  conservative  —  that  the  work  done  by  the 
manufacturing  population  of  Great  Britain  with  machinery  could 
not  be  done  without  it  by  a  j>eople  numbering  less  than  two  hundred 
million.  There  was  no  corresponding  development  of  manufac- 
tures on  the  Continent  —  not  even  in  France ;  thus  it  was  not  until 
1812  that  steam  spinning  was  introduced  into  Mulhouse,  the  great 


The  Continental  System  533 

industrial  capital  of  Alsace.  Similar  comparisons  could  be  drawn 
in  many  other  respects  between  Great  Britain  and  her  Continental 
neighbors ;  but  this  single  contrast  is  enough  to  render  very  strik- 
ing the  fact  that  no  other  power  could  vie  with  her  in  supplying 
the  world  with  cheap  and  useful  wares  of  such  a  sort  as  to  become 
after  a  first  trial  indispensable  to  the  masses  of  mankind.  She 
found  herself,  therefore,  in  the  position  of  being  required  for  the 
sake  of  peace  to  discard  all  her  commercial  advantages;  all  that 
she  had  gained  in  her  industrial  evolution;  all  the  preeminence, 
in  short,  which  she  held  by  exertions  and  sacrifices  that  had  been 
continuous  for  centuries. 

Does  such  a  situation  create  no  moral  obligation  ?  Is  it  sup- 
posable  that  a  nation  could  consider  for  an  instant  the  possibility 
of  destroying  itself  and  its  inheritance,  for  the  sake  of  peace  which 
would  surrender  all  its  advantages  to  an  active  and  irreconcilable 
enemy?  If  there  were  no  alternative  except  war  or  suicide,  is 
Great  Britain  to  be  blamed  for  choosing  war,  however  desperate  ? 
Moreover  there  is  another  consideration  of  the  first  impor- 
tance which  has  a  moral  quality  universally  recognized  in  other 
spheres.  By  common  consent  no  occupation  of  discovered  land 
holds  good  if  it  be  not  permanent  and  beneficent ;  and  likewise 
the  closed  economic  state  cannot  be  permanent  unless  it  prove  to 
be  universally  beneficent.  Such  a  state  now  appears  to  be  as 
uncertain  in  its  operations  as  the  closed  jural  State  has  proved  to 
be  under  the  operation  of  international  agreements  which  assist 
one  nation  to  enforce  its  municipal  law  by  the  sanction  of  another. 
Extradition  treaties  and  other  equally  pregnant  innovations  in 
international  law  are  now  generally  admitted  to  have  a  jural 
validity,  in  many  of  the  most  important  relations  of  men,  that  is 
both  higher  and  stronger  than  that  of  the  municipal  law  of  the 
various  States  which  compose  the  present  federation  of  civilized 
powers. 

In  the  same  way  —  tacitly,  perhaps,  but  none  the  less  really  — 
it  is  coming  to  be  widely  conceded  that  the  markets  of  the  world 
cannot  be  closed  to  wares  so  good  and  so  cheap  as  to  be  necessary 
for  the  ever-rising  standard  of  comfortable  living  demanded  by 
wage-earners  in  every  land,  except  on  condition  that  such  wares 
can  be  produced  sooner  or  later  as  well  and  as  cheaply  in  the  land 
which  protects  itself  against  others  of  its  own  class.  This  feel- 
ing is  the  cause  of  that  deep-rooted  enmity  of  the  masses  to  the 
customs  gatherer  and  his  kind  —  a  feeling  which  makes  them  the 
most  adroit  and  unscrupulous  smugglers.  The  dislike  they  have 


534  English  Historians 

of  the  travelling  and  smuggling  of  the  rich  is  largely  created  by  the 
knowledge,  or  at  least  the  certitude  they  feel,  that  thereby  the  rich 
secure  as  buyers  in  the  world's  markets  advantages  which  are  not 
open  to  themselves.  It  is  needless  to  explain  that  no  inkling  of 
such  a  temper,  however  common  in  earlier  generations,  is  dis- 
coverable in  the  England  of  Napoleonic  times ;  but  the  selfishness 
expressed  in  the  Orders  in  Council  was  the  cover  for  a  growing 
instinct  that  later  became  an  avowed  principle,  which  is  apparently 
destined  to  be  erected  into  a  moral  and  jural  right,  of  validity 
among  all  civilized  peoples  —  the  right  to  secure,  wherever  they 
can  best  be  obtained,  what  are  generally  regarded  as  the  essentials 
of  a  high  standard  of  life. 

The  present  cry  of  the  labor  agitators  for  what  they  call  a  "liv- 
ing wage"  means  for  the  protectionist  State  one  of  two  things: 
either  it  must  tax  itself  to  pay  a  scale  of  wages  which  will  secure 
the  desired  well-being  to  the  wage-earners  within  its  borders,  or 
it  must  make  the  wages  actually  paid  capable  of  purchasing  this 
well-being  by  opening  home  markets  to  the  competition  of  the 
low-wage  countries.  This  notion  has  already  beert  so  far  enter- 
tained as  to  result  in  the  admission,  duty  free,  into  all  protectionist 
lands  of  such  articles  as  are  not  of  native  growth  or  manufacture ; 
and  the  only  plea  for  high  protection  which  is  now  considered  valid 
is  based  on  the  assumption  that  exorbitant  duties  are  only  tem- 
porary and  must  be  removed  as  soon  as  the  infant  manufactures 
which  they  protect  can  walk  alone  and  compete  in  the  markets  of 
the  world.  The  spread  of  free-trade  doctrine  is  everywhere  con- 
terminous with  the  spread  of  free-trade  ability.  The  criterion  of 
personal  and  of  national  success  is  ultimately  the  same :  power  of 
any  kind  will  create  activity  and  a  field  for  that  activity ;  and  the 
greater  the  power,  the  wider  the  field  which  it  will  preempt. 
Apparently  this  has  been  true  in  spite  of  both  artificial  and  so- 
called  natural  barriers.  Human  ability  is  shown  by  history  to  be 
like  natural  energy:  personal  or  collective,  it  is  infinitely  trans- 
formable and  can  be  directed  into  all  channels.  The  mountain 
waterfall  drives  the  trolley-car,  which  at  the  same  time  it  both  heats 
and  lights ;  the  toil  of  the  artisan  and  the  laborer  together  with  the 
enterprise  of  the  manufacturer  and  the  merchant,  moves  armies 
and  fleets,  secures  settlements  and  markets  in  all  lands,  creates 
public  and  even  cosmopolitan  opinion  —  in  short,  directs  the 
course  of  empire  throughout  the  world. 


The  Continental  System 


§  12.  Evasions  of  the  Continental  System 

The  effort  of  Great  Britain  to  establish  a  monopoly  of  ocean 
commerce  was  accompanied  by  one  immoral  incident  of  the  most 
far-reaching  importance  —  the  inauguration  of  a  licensing  system 
whereby,  with  simulated  papers,  vessels  of  any  origin  successfully 
evaded  the  provisions  of  both  the  British  orders  and  the  French 
decrees.  This  procedure  for  a  time  debauched  the  commerce 
of  the  world,  and  was  a  fit  supplement  to  the  acts  of  violence 
severely  reprobated  both  then  and  since.  In  the  main,  fraud  and 
violence  brought  greater  profit  to  France  than  to  Great  Britain. 
The  relaxation  in  1798  of  the  rule  of  1756  had  accrued  to  the 
advantage  of  the  only  strict  neutral  power  of  the  world,  viz.,  the 
United  States ;  the  orders  and  the  decrees  so  hampered  and  exas- 
perated our  merchants  that  we  first  passed  the  Embargo  Act 
and  then  took  refuge  in  non-intercourse.  By  that  time  English 
commerce  had  so  seriously  declined  under  the  working  of  the  Con- 
tinental System  that  violent  agitation  against  the  orders  was  in- 
augurated in  Great  Britain  itself.  Almost  at  that  very  moment, 
however,  Napoleon  drove  the  reigning  house  of  Portugal  to  Brazil, 
and  thus  opened  the  most  important  ports  of  South  America  to 
British  importations.  The  glut  of  the  English  storehouses  .was 
thus  momentarily  relieved;  and,  while  the  merchants  suffered 
serious  loss  from  the  low  prices  they  received,  they  were  saved  from 
absolute  bankruptcy.  For  two  years  longer  the  struggle  on  both 
sides  was  continued  with  desperation,  and  would  probably  have 
resulted  in  the  despair  of  Great  Britain  had  not  the  improved 
methods  of  agriculture,  introduced  along  with  the  improved 
methods  in  manufacturing,  made  it  possible  to  feed  for  some  time 
longer  the  still  comparatively  small  population  by  means  of  home 
production. 

§  13.    The  Sources  of  British  Strength 

This  was  the  interval  which  brought  matters  to  a  crisis  on  the 
Continent.  Great  Britain  could  get  on  very  well  without  the  silks 
and  other  luxuries  produced  in  France,  substituting  for  them  wool- 
lens and  cottons ;  but  English  cruisers  made  almost  impossible  the 
importation  into  Europe  not  only  of  colonial  necessities,  but  also 
of  the  raw  materials  necessary  for  indispensable  manufactures. 
By  the  system  of  licenses  alone  was  it  possible  to  maintain  the 


536  English   Historians 

French  army;  cloth  and  leather  wherewith  to  outfit  Napoleon's 
soldiers  were  brought  from  England  into  the  Hanseatic  ports  in 
open  contempt  of  the  Continental  System.  Since  Great  Britain 
also  held  the  monopoly  of  coffee,  tea,  and  sugar,  without  which 
the  not  more  than  half-hearted  Germans  of  the  Rhine  Confedera- 
tion would  not  live,  and  which  Napoleon  did  not  dare  to  cut  off 
entirely  from  even  the  French  and  Italians,  it  was  thought  that 
the  only  possible  reprisals  against  her  not  already  instituted  would 
be  in  the  line  of  further  restrictions  on  her  manufactures.  During 
the  late  summer  and  early  autumn  of  1810  were  promulgated  the 
three  decrees  of  Trianon,  St.  Cloud,  and  Fontainebleau ;  and  not 
only  were  enormous  duties  imposed  on  all  colonial  products 
wherever  found,  but  all  English  goods  discovered  in  the  lands  of 
the  French  system  were  to  be  burnt.  Neutral  ships,  including 
those  of  the  United  States,  were  at  the  same  time  utterly  shut  out 
from  all  the  harbors  of  these  lands. 

This  was  the  beginning  of  the  end ;  for  in  the  effort  to  destroy 
the  English  sea  power  by  condemning  it  to  inanition,  Napoleon 
deprived  the  manufacturers  in  his  own  lands  of  all  their  raw 
materials.  Even  if  this  had  not  been  a  sufficient  cause,  their 
manufacturing  plants  were  not  modern  enough  to  have  supplied 
the  markets  open  to  them.  Russia  endured  the  miseries  of  priva- 
tion-for  but  a  single  year  and  in  1811  opened  her  ports;  while 
smuggling  on  her  boundary  lines  at  once  assumed  dimensions, 
which  rendered  anything  approaching  an  administration  of  the 
Continental  System  the  work  of  an  army  of  customs  officers,  so 
that  after  1812  the  effort  to  enforce  it  was  necessarily  abandoned. 
Our  declaration  of  war  with  England  came  too  late  to  exert  any 
influence,  one  way  or  the  other,  on  the  final  solution  of  the  question 
whether  sea  power  or  land  power  was  the  stronger  in  the  civilized 
world  at  the  opening  of  this  century.  The  death  throes  of  Na- 
poleon's imperial  system  were  primarily  caused  by  the  exhaustion 
of  France  and  of  himself;  when  he  made  himself  a  dynastic  ruler, 
his  prestige  and  his  inherent  strength  were  dissipated  as  rapidly  as 
were  those  of  the  popes  when  they  joined  the  ranks  of  the  petty 
princes  of  Italy.  Possibly  an  empire  of  United  Europe  based  on 
the  liberal  ideas  of  the  day  might  have  had  some  chance  for  life, 
but  a  single  dynastic  power  pitted  against  all  the  dynasties  of  the 
Continent,  and  also  against  the  moral  strength  of  British  pre- 
eminence in  politics  and  industry,  had  none  at  all.  It  is  a  mis- 
take to  regard  the  Continental  System  as  an  influential  cause  of 
Napoleon's  overthrow,  except  in  so  far  as  it  displayed  the  folly 


The  Continental  System  537 

of  attempting  to  apply  what  is  at  best  a  temporary  national  ex- 
pedient as  a  permanent  principle  in  a  world  system.  The  effort 
did  cripple  the  resources  of  France  and  alienate  much  Continental 
sympathy  from  the  Emperor,  and  it  embittered  Great  Britain  to  the 
point  of  desperation;  but  the  result  of  the  struggle  to  found  a 
Napoleonic  hierarchy  of  two  degrees  on  the  States  of  the  Continent 
was  otherwise  determined.  It  was  decided  by  the  national  up- 
risings which  began  in  Spain  and  ended  with  the  consolidation  of 
dynastic  influence  in  the  Holy  Alliance. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Rose,  Napoleon  and  English  Commerce,  in  the  English  Historical  Re- 
view, 1893,  pp.  704  ff.  Lecky,  History  oj  England  in  the  Eighteenth 
Century,  Vol.  VII,  chap.  xx.  Fournier,  Napoleon  the  First,  consult  the 
index  under  the  title  :'  Continental  System."  There  is  a  useful  collection  of 
sources  in  the  Pennsylvania  Translations  and  Reprints,  Vol.  II,  no.  2.  Im- 
portant materials  will  be  found  also  in  Professor  Anderson's  Constitutions 
and  Documents  Illustrative  oj  the  History  of  France.  The  Cambridge 
Modern  History,  Vol.  IX,  chap,  viii  on  the  command  of  the  sea,  and 
chap,  xiii  on  the  Continental  System. 


PART  VIII 
THE  AGE   OF  REFORM 

CHAPTER   I 

THE   OLD   PARLIAMENTARY   SYSTEM 

IN  its  origin  and  development  the  Parliamentary  system  of 
England  had  never  been  shaped  according  to  any  logical  or  demo- 
cratic principles.  On  the  eve  of  the  great  Reform  Bill  of  1832, 
it  rested  on  customs  which  had  grown  up  gradually  and  on  statutes 
which  had  been  passed  to  meet  specific  problems.  Consequently 
it  presented  many  grievances  especially  to  the  manufacturing  and 
working  classes  which  had  sprung  up  as  a  result  of  the  industrial 
revolution.  The  franchise  was  restricted  and  unequal,  representa- 
tives were  not  apportioned  according  to  population,  and  the  gov- 
ernment was  corrupt.  It  is  of  prime  importance,  therefore,  that 
the  old  Parliamentary  system  should  be  studied  as  a  preliminary 
to  an  understanding  of  the  great  measures  which  transformed 
England  into  a  political  democracy. 

§  i.   Means  of  Communication  and  Politics  l 

There  is  at  the  present  time  no  town  in  either  England  or  Wales 
which  a  man  cannot  reach  in  a  twelve  hours'  journey  from  Lon- 
don. He  may  be  whirled  from  the  metropolis  to  York  or  from 
York  to  the  metropolis  in  four  hours.  Two  hundred  years  ago  a 
gentleman  would  have  thought  himself  fortunate  if  he  had  been 
able  to  reach  London  from  Northumberland  in  a  week.  A  coach 
in  1706  undertook  with  the  blessing  of  God  to  convey  persons  from 
London  to  York  in  four  days.  The  facilities  which  roads  and 

1  Walpole,  History  of  England  since  1815,  Vol.  I,  pp.  114  ff.  By  per- 
mission of  Longmans,  Green,  &  Company,  Publishers. 

538 


The  Old  Parliamentary  System  539 

railways  have  afforded  to  travellers  have  indirectly  led  to  an 
alteration  in  the  composition  of  the  House  of  Commons.  Par- 
liamentary reform  might  have  been  almost  indefinitely  delayed,  if 
it  had  not  been  for  Telford,  Brindley,  and  Stephenson. 

In  the  days  when  travelling  was  difficult  and  dangerous,  the 
right  of  representation  was  of  little  value.  A  journey  from  Lon- 
don to  Northumberland  was  a  more  hazardous  operation  than  a 
journey  to  New  York  is  now;  and  the  burgesses,  who  were  en- 
titled to  send  members  to  Parliament,  found  it  difficult  to  obtain 
persons  who  were  willing  to  act  as  their  representatives.  It  be- 
came necessary  to  adopt  the  practice  of  making  some  allowance 
to  the  people  who  were  thus  selected,  and  the  borough  member 
became  in  consequence  a  paid  delegate,  and  not  an  unpaid  repre- 
sentative. In  such  a  state  of  things  the  privilege  of  repre- 
sentation was  naturally  of  little  value.  Places  which  had  origi- 
nally enjoyed  the  right  of  returning  members  ceased  to  exercise 
it.  Places  in  which  the  crown  or  some  wealthy  person  had  in-  A 
fluence  were  given  the  right,  and  no  one  ever  questioned  the  \ 
power  of  the  crown  to  grant  it.  The  Tudor  sovereigns  created -^ 
borough  after  borough;  but  the  creations  attracted  no  attention. 

The  great  contest  nf  thp  s,e.ypntppnth  century  fundamentally 
alfr»re<]  ttu»rpftgitign  of  the  House  of  Commons.  By  asserting  its 
right  to  exercise  a  dectsTve"  control  over  the  government  of  the 
country,  the  House  established  its  position  and  its  influence. 
Almost  at  the  same  time  some  progress  was  made  towards  better, 
cheaper,  and  quicker  travelling.  Parliament  complained  that 
country  gentlemen  were  coming  to  London,  instead  of  staying 
at  home.  They  failed  to  observe  that  the  causes,  which  were  col- 
lecting all  the  country  gentlemen  into  one  centre,  were  contribut- 
ing to  increase  the  influence  of  the  House  of  Commons.  Yet  there 
can  hardly  be  a  question  that  this  was  the  case.  The  moment  that 
it  became  the  fashion  for  a  country  gentleman  to  spend  a  certain 
period  of  each  year  in  London,  all  the  apprehensions  connected 
with  the  journey  disappeared.  No  further  difficulty  was  ex- 
perienced in  obtaining  members  for  each  borough,  and  a  seat  in 
Parliament  became  of  value  from  the  social  influence  and  the 
position  which  it  gave.  In  the  meanwhile  other  parts  of  England 
shared  the  increasing  prosperity  which  was  visible  in  the  metropo- 
lis. New  centres  of  industry  acquired  fresh  importance,  while 
the  old  boroughs,  in  which  the  county  families  had  met  together, 
either  ceased  to  grow  or  began  slowly  to  decay. 


540  English  Historians 


§  2.   Population  and  Representation 

Population  was  sfoyjv  gravitating  to  particular  centres ;  and 
the  House  of  Commons,  while  the  country  was  changlng/suddenly 
•>•<!  further  changes,  in  its  constitution."  Before  the  seven  - 
teenth  century  the  constitution  of  the  Hou-c  of  Common-  h.id  I.een 
constantly  altered.  Henry  VIII  created  seventeen  new  boroughs, 
Edward  VI  fourteen  new  boroughs,  Mary  ten  new  boroughs, 
Elizabeth  twenty-four  new  boroughs,  and  James  I  four  new 
boroughs.  Charles  II  gave  members  to  Durham  and  Newark; 
but,  with  this  exception,  no  new  borough  was  created,  either  in 
England  or  Wales,  from  the  death  of  James  I  to  the  Reform  Bill 
of  1832.  The  House  of  Commons,  after  the  Restoration,  took 
the  issue  of  writs  into  its  own  hands,  and  declined  to  recognize 
those  which  had  been  issued  by  the  crown.  The  constitution  of 
the  House  of  Commons  was  thus  stereotyped,  for  the  first  time  in 
English  history,  at  the  time  at  which  the  population  of  England 
was  being  collected  in  fresh  centres.  The  representation  of  the 
people  was  becoming  more  unequal,  and  no  attempt  to  redress 
the  inequalities  was  made. 

At  the  period  at  which  this  history  opens  the  House  of  Commons 
consisted  of  658  members:  489  of  these  were  returned  by  Eng- 
land, loo  by  Ireland,  45  by  Scotland,  and  24  by  Wales.  The 
representation  of  England  was  more  unequal  than  that  of  either 
of  the  other  divisions  of  the  kingdom.  The  10  southern  counties 
of  England  contained  a  population  of  about  2,900,000  souls,  and 
returned  237  members  to  Parliament.  The  30  other  counties 
of  England  contained  a  population  of  more  than  8,350,000  souls, 
and  returned  252  members  to  Parliament.  A  little  more  than  a 
fourth  of  the  population  returned  very  nearly  one-half  of  the  whole 
of  the  English  representatives.  Scotland  contained  a  population 
of  nearly  2,000,000  persons;  Cornwall  contained  rather  more  than 
a  quarter  of  a  million  of  people.  Yet  all  Scotland  returned  only 
45  members,  while  the  county  of  Cornwall  returned  44. 

Representation  then  bore  iao  proportion  to  population;  and 
the  population,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  had  little  or  nothing  to  do 
with  the  representation.  It  was  stated  in  1793  that  the  majority 
of  the  House  of  Commons  was  "elected  by  less  than  15,000 
electors."  Seventy  members  were  elected  by  34  places,  in 
which  "it  would  be  to  trifle  with  patience  to  mention  any  num- 
ber of  voters  whatever,  the  election  being  notoriously  a  mere 


The  Old   Parliamentary  System  541 

matter  of  form."  .  .  .  Two  hundred  and  ninety-four  members, 
being  a  majority  of  the  entire  House  of  Commons  in  1793,  were 
returned  by  constituencies,  none  of  which  had  250  and  in  the 
great  majority  of  which  there  were  not  100  voters.  There  were  not 
4000  electors  in  all  Scotland. 

Fifteen  thousand  electors  nominally  returned  a  majority  of  the 
whole  House  of  Commons  in  1793.  But  the  share  which  these 
15,000  individuals  had  in  the  election  was  purely  nominal.  One 
hundred  and  seventy-two  of  the  English  and  Welsh  members  were 
returned  on  the  direct  nomination  of  the  Treasury  or  of  individuals, 
and  137  other  members  owed  their  return  to  the  influence  either 
of  the  Treasury  or  of  individuals.  The  45  Scotch  members  were 
nominated  by  35  persons.  Three  hundred  and  fifty-four  members 
were  therefore  returned  on  the  recommendation  of  the  Treasury 
or  of  some  patron.  The  union  with  Ireland,  in  1801,  added  100 
members  to  the  roll  of  the  House  of  Commons.  But  51  of  these 
were  returned  by  36  peers,  and  20  by  19  commoners.  The  union 
had  increased  the  roll  of  the  House  to  658,  and  424  of  the 
658  members  were  returned  either  on  the  nomination,  or  on  the 
recommendation  of  patrons. 

§  3.   Political  Power  of  the  Peers 

At  the  commencement  of  every  session  the  House  was  in  the 
habit  of  resolving  that  "it  is  a  high  infringement  upon  the  liberties 
and  privileges  of  the  Commons  of  Great  Britain,  for  any  Lord  of 
Parliament,  or  any  Lord-Lieutenant  of  a  county,  to  concern  them- 
selves in  the  election  of  members  to  serve  for  the  Commons  in 
Parliament."  Yet  245  members  were  notoriously  returned  by 
the  influence  of  128  peers.  Lord  Lonsdale,  from  returning  nine 
members,  was  commonly  known  as  "the  premier's  cat-o'-nine- 
tails." The  Duke  of  Newcastle,  Lord  Buckingham,  Lord  Mount 
Edgecumbe,  and  Lord  Eliot  returned,  in  1793,  six  members  each. 
The  Duke  of  Marlborough  and  Lord  Fitzwilliam,  five  each. 
The  Duke  of  Northumberland,  the  Duke  of  Bedford,  the  Duke 
of  Rutland,  Lord  Ailesburv,  and  Lord  Stafford,  four  each. 
The  Duke  of  Beaufort,  Lord  Sandwich,  Lord  Foley,  and  Lord 
Uxbridge,  three  each.  Such  was  the  state  of  things  in  1793. 

The  strength  of  the  great  political  peers  did  not  lie  in  the  boroughs 
alone.  Many  of  the  English  counties  returned,  as  a  matter  of 
course,  the  nominees  of  the  great  landowners.  It  was  a  common 
saying,  attributed  to  Fox,  that  Yorkshire  and  Middlesex  between 


English   Historians 

them  made  all  England.  Yet,  even  in  Yorkshire,  the  contest 
rather  lay  between  the  Lascelles  and  the  Fitzwilliams  than  the 
aristocracy  and  the  people.  Up  to  1 780  the  member  for  York- 
shire had  always  been  elected  in  Lord  Rockingham's  dining  room. 
If  such  was  the  state  of  things  in  Yorkshire,  it  is  easy  to  imagine 
what  occurred  in  less  populous  counties.  A  contested  election  in 
many  counties  was  a  rare  occurrence.  It  was  found  in  1831  that 
there  were  no  poll-books  in  Denbighshire.  There  had  been  no 
contest  for  a  hundred  years  in  Cheshire,  in  Nottinghamshire,  and 
Cardiganshire.  There  had  been  no  contest  for  nearly  fifty  years 
in  Anglesey;  and  there  had  been  no  contest  for  twenty  years 
in  Derbyshire,  Gloucestershire,  Hertfordshire,  Lancashire,  Mon- 
mouthshire, Radnorshire,  Flintshire,  and  Rutland. 

§  4.  Scotch  and  Irish  Conditions 

The  condition  of  the  Scotch  counties  was  even  worse.  In  Eng- 
land every  forty-shilling  freeholder  was  a  voter.  Manufacturers, 
large  tenant  farmers,  opulent  and  important  inhabitants,  were 
excluded  from  the  franchise  unless  they  happened  to  possess  a 
little  land;  but  every  landowner,  not  disqualified  by  religion,  by 
age,  or  by  sex,  had  a  vote.  But  in  Scotland  the  landowners  had 
nothing  whatever  to  do  with  the  representation.  The  franchise 
was  vested  in  the  owners  of  superiorities;  and  these  superiorities 
had  the  entire  representation  in  their  hands.  Any  owner  of  a 
superiority,  producing  £400  a  year,  was  entitled  to  a  vote;  and 
the  superiorities  were  cut  up  into  different  parcels  of  four  hun- 
dred a  year  each,  for  the  sake  of  giving  votes.  The  owner  of  the 
superiority,  as  the  direct  grant  from  the  crown  was  called,  had 
not  necessarily  any  land  in  the  county;  he  did  not  necessarily 
reside  in  it,  yet  no  one  except  the  owner  of  a  superiority  was 
allowed  a  vote. 

The  whole  number  of  county  electors  in  Scotland  was  variously 
estimated  at  from  2500  to  2900  persons.  Fife  was  said  to  contain 
240  voters,  Cromarty  only  9 !  Scott  mentions  incidentally  that 
young  Harden  was  returned  for  Roxburghshire,  at  the  memorable 
election  of  1831,  by  a  "great  majority  of  40  to  19"!  Yet 
Roxburgh  had  a  population  of  more  than  40,000  persons.  "The 
county  of  Bute,  with  a  population  of  14,000,  had  21  electors,  of 
whom  only  one  resided  in  the  county."  "At  an  election  at 
Bute,  not  beyond  the  memory  of  man,"  said  the  Lord  Advocate 
in  1831,  "only  one  person  attended  the  meeting,  except  the 


The  Old  Parliamentary  System  543 

sheriff  and  the  returning  officer.  He,  of  course,  took  the  chair, 
constituted  the  meeting,  called  over  the  roll  of  freeholders,  answered 
to  his  own  name,  took  the  vote  as  to  the  preses,  and  elected  him- 
self. He  then  moved  and  seconded  his  own  nomination,  put  the 
question  to  the  vote,  and  was  unanimously  returned."  .  .  . 

§  5.   Borough  Constituencies 

It  was,  however,  in  the  boroughs  that  the  great  governing  fami- 
Ke^ -exercised  their  chief  authority.  The  borough  constituency 
varied  in  different  places.  In  some  boroughs  in  England  and  Wales, 
and  in  every  borough  in  Scotland,  the  members  were  returned 
by  the  corporation.  The  corporations  were,  at  that  time  (1815), 
unreformed;  they  were  usually  self-elected,  and  the  provisions 
oFIHeTest  Act  effectually  excluded  all  Roman  Catholics  from 
sitting  upon  them.  In  some  places  in  England  and  Wales  the 
members  were  returned  by  the  inhabitants  paying  scot  and  lot, 
or  in  other  words  by  the  ratepayers;  while  in  other  places  the 
potwallers  or  potwallopers  —  or  all  the  resident  inhabitants  who 
paid  for  their  own  subsistence  —  had  a  vote.  In  some  places, 
again,  the  franchise  was  divided  among  these  various  classes. 

This  variety  of  franchise  created  almost  endless  confusion. 
"Your  honorable  house,"  said  the  petitioners  of  1793,  "is  but  too 
well  acquainted  with  the  tedious,  intricate,  and  expensive  scenes 
of  litigation  which  have  been  brought  before  you  in  attempting  to 
settle  the  legal  import  of  those  numerous  distinctions  which  per- 
plex a.id  confound  the  present  rights  of  voting.  How  many 
months  of  your  valuable  time  have  been  wasted  in  listening  to  the 
wrangling  of  lawyers  upon  the  various  species  of  burgagehold, 
leasehold,  and  freehold.  How  many  committees  have  been  occu- 
pied in  investigating  the  nature  of  scot  and  lot,  potwallers,  com- 
monalty, populacy,  resiant  inhabitants,  and  inhabitants  at  large. 
What  labor  and  research  have  been  employed  in  endeavoring  to 
ascertain  the  legal  claim  of  boroughmen,  aldermen,  portmen, 
selectmen,  burgesses,  and  councilmen;  and  what  confusion  has 
arisen  from  the  complicated  operation  of  clashing  charters,  from 
freemen,  resident  and  non-resident,  and  from  the  different  modes 
of  obtaining  the  freedom  of  corporations  by  birth,  by  servitude, 
by  marriage,  by  redemption,  by  election,  and  by  purchase."  Com- 
plicated, however,  as  these  tenures  were,  there  was  one  charac- 
teristic which  was  common  to  nearly  all  of  them.  The  patron 
exercised  an  unbounded  influence  in  the  borough.  In  some  cases 


544  English  Historians 

the  corporation,  in  other  cases  the  inhabitants,  in  others  again 
the  ratepayers,  nominally  elected  the  members.  Corporation, 
inhabitants,  ratepayers,  were  all  agreed  in  voting  for  the  patron's 
nominee. 

A  few  prominent  examples  will  illustrate  the  position  of  the  old 
boroughs.  Lord  Beverly's  borough  of  Beeralston  had  only  one 
house  in  it  rated  at  over  £10  a  year;  Mr.  Bankes'  borough  of 
Corfe  Castle  was  a  cluster  of  cottages  round  a  venerable  ruin. 
Lord  Calthorpe's  borough  of  Bramber  was  an  agricultural  dis- 
trict inhabited  by  about  100  persons.  Lord  Monson's  borough 
of  Gatton  was  a  gentleman's  park.  Lord  Caledon's  borough  of 
Old  Sarum  was  a  green  mound.  Lord  Huntingfield's  borough  of 
Dunwich  had  been  submerged  for  centuries  beneath  the  North 
Sea.  There  were  13  electors  in  Malmesbury,  none  of  whom 
could  write.  The  19  electors  of  Helston  voted  unanimously 
with  the  Duke  of  Leeds.  There  were  310  electors  in  Arundel, 
but  195  voted  with  the  Duke  of  Norfolk.  At  the  general  election 
of  1818  Lord  Falmouth  on  one  side,  and  the  regent  on  the  other, 
made  the  utmost  endeavor  to  carry  Truro.  After  a  ruinous  con- 
test, Lord  Falmouth 's  candidates  polled  12;  the  regent's,  n  votes. 
These  examples  were,  at  the  time,  so  notorious,  that  grave  men 
thought  that  there  was  nothing  ludicrous  in  gravely  stating  them. 
It  seems  hardly  to  have  occurred  to  the  politicians  of  that  time  that 
there  was  anything  ridiculous  in  the  mention  of  a  contest  between 
12  electors  on  the  one  side  and  n  on  the  other. 

§  6.    The  Traffic  in  Boroughs 

The  borough  owners  disposed  of  their  property  in  different 
ways.  All  of  them  acted  on  the  blunt  maxim  which  the  Duke  of 
Newcastle  propounded  in  1829,  "Have  I  not  the  right  to  do  what 
I  like  with  my  own  ?  "  But,  though  they  were  probably  unanimous 
in  agreeing  with  the  duke,  they  did  not  all  carry  out  their  theory 
in  the  same  manner.  Some  borough  owners  simply  sold  their 
boroughs  to  the  highest  bidder.  Ten  thousand  pounds  was  com- 
monly offered  for  the  two  seats  during  a  single  Parliament.  Other 
borough  owners  again  sold  their  seats,  at  a  regular  price,  to  mem- 
bers of  their  own  party.  Lord  Mount  Edgecumbe,  for  instance, 
used  to  receive  ^2000  from  each  of  his  candidates  for  Lostwithiel. 
Some  portion  of  the  £4000  which  he  thus  received  was  distributed 
by  him  as  plate  money  to  the  20  or  30  electors  of  the  bor- 
ough. Another  portion  was  devoted  to  local  objects  and  to 


The  Old  Parliamentary  System  545 

subsidizing  the  borough  funds.  The  residue  found  its  way  to  the 
patron's  pocket.  Other  borough  owners  placed  their  patronage 
at  the  disposal  of  their  party,  or  nominated  their  own  relations  or 
their  own  friends.  An  act  was,  indeed,  passed  in  1809  to  stop  this 
traffic,  but  the  traffic  still  continued.  It  was  stated  in  a  petition 
to  the  House  of  Commons  in  1817  that  seats  were  bought  and  sold 
like  tickets  in  the  opera.  The  best  men  saw  nothing  disgraceful 
in  breaking  the  law  and  in  buying  a  seat.  Romilly  declared  in 
1805  that  he  had  formed  "an  unalterable  resolution  never  to  come 
into  Parliament,"  unless  he  held  a  public  office,  "but  by  a  popular 
election  or  by  paying  the  common  price"  for  his  seat.  Ricardo 
was  nominated  for  Portarlington,  in  return  for  a  loan  of  ^40,000 
or  ^S0*000  w^h  which  he  accommodated  the  patron  of  the  bor- 
ough. .  .  . 

§  7.    Bribery  and  Sale  of  Representation 

The  whole  of  the  boroughs,  however,  were  not  at  the  disposal 
of  any  patron.  In  some  places  the  constituency  was  free  to  return 
a  candidate  of  its  own  choice.  A  few  of  the  largest  towns  really 
prided  themselves  on  securing  the  success  of  what  was  called  a 
popular  candidate,  but  even  these  places  were  disgraced  by  scenes 
which  now  seem  incredible.  Lord  J.  Russell  stated  in  the  House 
of  Commons  in  1831  that  if  an  intelligent  foreigner  were  taken  to 
a  great  and  opulent  town,  Liverpool  for  instance,  "he  would  see 
bribery  prevail  to  the  greatest  extent;  he  would  see  men  openly 
paid  fer  their  votes."  An  election  in  Westminster  involved  a  fort- 
night of  riot  and  drunkenness.  When  Brougham  stood  for  Liver- 
pool it  was  recorded  that  two  or  three  men  were  killed,  but  that 
the  town  was  quiet.  A  riot,  in  which  only  two  or  three  men  lost 
their  lives,  was  thought  hardly  worth  noticing.  "By  long-estab- 
lished custom  the  single  vote  of  a  resident  elector  at  Hull  was 
rewarded  with  a  donation  of  two  guineas;  four  were  paid  for  a 
plumper;  and  the  expenses  of  a  freeman's  journey  from  London 
averaged  £10  apiece.  The  letter  of  the  law  was  not  broken, 
because  the  money  was  not  paid  till  the  last  day  on  which  election 
petitions  could  be  presented."  At  Stafford  £7  was  given  for  a 
single  vote,  ^14  for  a  plumper,  to  be  paid  for  about  a  twelvemonth 
after  the  election.  "The  price  of  votes  (at  Maidstone)  was  as 
regularly  fixed  as  the  price  of  bread  —  so  much  for  a  single  vote 
and  so  much  for  a  plumper."  There  were  about  two  hundred 
and  forty  electors  at  Abingdon,  seventy  of  whom  took  money. 


546  English  Historians 

Lord  Cochrane  admitted  in  the  House  of  Commons  that  after 
his  return  for  Honiton,  he  sent  the  town  crier  around  the  bor- 
ough to  tell  the  voters  to  go  to  the  chief  banker  for  £10  los.  each. 
In  1766  Sudbury  shamelessly  offered  itself  for  sale.  In  1768  the 
corporation  of  Oxford  sold  the  representation  of  the  city  to  the 
Duke  of  Marlborough  and  Lord  Abingdon.  In  1826  the  bor- 
ough of  Leicester  spent  £10,000  in  securing  the  election  of  a 
political  partisan.  .  .  . 

Bribery  and  drunkenness  were  encouraged  by  the  law  which 
protracted  the  taking  of  the  poll.  Rapid  polling  was  indeed  im- 
possible. In  1807,  for  example,  the  poll  clerk  at  Horsham  had 
to  take  "down  the  description  of  every  burgage  tenement  from 
the  deeds  of  the  voters."  Only  seventy-three  electors  were  polled, 
but  the  complicated  process  occupied  the  greater  part  of  two  days. 
It  may  easily  be  imagined  that  in  larger  constituencies  a  process 
of  this  kind  must  have  taken  not  days  but  weeks;  and  the  law 
allowed  the  poll  to  be  open  for  weeks.  At  the  general  election  of 
1784  the  contest  for  Westminster  continued  for  upwards  of  six 
weeks,  and  was  followed  by  a  scrutiny  which  lasted  for  the  best 
part  of  a  year.  But  the  scandals  connected  with  this  election  were 
too  great  even  for  the  politicians  of  the  eighteenth  century.  A  law 
was  passed  "limiting  every  poll  to  fifteen  days,  and  closing  a 
scrutiny  within  thirty  days  after  the  close  of  the  poll."  But  this 
law,  though  it  undoubtedly  constituted  a  great  reform,  still  per- 
mitted the  most  inordinate  expenditure.  In  the  great  struggles 
in  1807,  whe^n  Wilberforce,  Lord  Milton,  and  Lascelles  were 
engaged  in  a  triangular  contest  for  the  representation  of  Yorkshire, 
the  poll  was  kept  open  for  the  full  legal  period  of  fifteen  days,  and 
Lord  Milton  and  Lascelles  spent  between  them  £200,000.  The 
lavish  expenditure,  inseparable  from  a  contested  election  in  a 
popular  constituency,  increased  the  influence  of  a  few  territorial 
magnates.  It  was  hardly  worth  any  man's  while  to  waste  a  fortune 
on  a  single  contest;  and  the  expense  of  a  county  election  gave, 
therefore,  a  monopoly  of  the  representation  to  a  few  great  families. 

Bribery  was  indirectly  encouraged  by  another  circumstance. 
In  theory  everybody  reprobated  it;  in  practice  everybody  laughed 
at  it.  Up  to  1770  election  petitions  were  tried  in  the  whole 
House,  and  the  decision  of  the  House  was  avowedly  pronounced 
on  party  grounds,  and  had  no  reference  to  the  merits  of  the  case. 
Sir  Robert  Walpole  was  driven  from  office  by  an  adverse  vote  on 
the  Chippenham  election  petition.  In  1770  George  Grenville 
persuaded  Parliament  to  adopt  a  little  better  system.  Under  the 


The  Old  Parliamentary  System  547 

Grenville  Act  a  committee  was  appointed  to  try  the  election. 
Forty-nine  members  were  chosen  by  ballot ;  each  party  to  the  peti- 
tion .had  the  right  of  objecting  to  eighteen  of  these  names;  the 
remaining  thirteen,  associated  with  two  others,  one  of  whom  was 
nominated  on  either  side  of  the  House,  constituted  the  tribunal 
to  determine  the  election.  The  Grenville  committees,  as  they 
were  commonly  called,  were  far  better  tribunals  than  the  whole 
House  for  determining  the  legality  of  an  election.  But  the  Gren- 
ville committees  were  as  much  influenced  as  the  House  had  been 
by  party  considerations.  In  a  committee  of  fifteen  members  one 
party  or  the  other  was  necessarily  in  the  majority,  and  the  mem- 
bers usually  voted  with  their  political  friends  and  disregarded 
their  own  conclusions.  A  tribunal  of  this  description  was  not 
likely  to  stamp  out  bribery;  and  bribery  consequently  continued 
unchecked  and  unreproved. 

§  8.   The  Spoils  of  Office 

At  the  time,  then,  at  which  this  history  commences,  the  con- 
stituencies were  divisible  into  two  classes:  some  places  were 
notoriously  corrupt;  others  were  notoriously  in  the  hands  of  the 
landed  interest.  The  class  which  thus  enjoyed  a  monopoly  of 
political  power  obtained  its  full  share  of  the  good  things  of  this 
world.  A  political  career  was  indeed  a  lottery,  but  it  was  a  lottery 
in  which  the  prizes  were  very  large,  and  in  which  even  moderate 
success  was  rewarded  with  extravagant  liberality.  A  successful 
politician  could  easily  insure  his  own  affluence,  and  could  usually 
obtain  a  comfortable  provision  for  his  children.  Lord  Grenville, 
on  retiring  in  1801,  secured  a  pension  of  £1500  a  year  for  Lady 
Grenville.  Yet  Lord  Grenville  was  auditor  of  the  Exchequer,  a 
sinecure  producing  £4000  a  year,  and  his  younger  brother,  Thomas 
Grenville,  received  upwards  of  £2000  a  year  as  one  of  the  chief 
justices  in  eyre.  The  Duke  of  Portland  succeeded  Lord  Gren- 
ville. His  son,  Lord  William  Bentinck,  received  £1131  as  clerk 
of  the  pipe  in  the  Exchequer,  and  £2511  as  colonel  of  the  nth 
Dragoons.  .  .  . 

These  are  a  few  instances  of  the  extravagant  provisions  which 
successful  politicians  and  successful  lawyers  were  allowed  to  make 
for  their  posterity  or  for  themselves.  It  would  be  easy  to  extend 
the  list  to  an  almost  indefinite  length.  It  is  difficult  to  define  the 
duties  of  a  teller  of  the  Exchequer,  yet  four  tellers  of  the  Exchequer 
drew  no  less  than  £2600  a  year  each.  No  duties  of  special 


548  English  Historians 

importance  were  attached  to  the  registrarship  of  the  Court  of  Ad- 
miralty; yet  Lord  Arden,  the  registrar,  drew  at  least  £10,000  a 
year.  The  chief  clerkship  of  the  House  of  Commons  would  -have 
been  adequately  paid  with  £2000  a  year,  and  the  fees  of  the  office 
amounted  to  six  times  that  sum.  The  fees  of  the  clerk  of  the 
pleas  in  Ireland  amounted  to  £10,000  a  year;  his  deputy  received 
no  less  than  £7000,  not  one  shilling  of  which,  according  to  a  high 
authority,  was  legal. 

Pensions  and  places  were  not  the  only  rewards  at  the  disposal 
of  successful  statesmen  and  successful  lawyers.  Peerages  were 
granted  with  a  prodigality  which  exceeds  belief,  and  pensions 
were  in  their  turn  bestowed  to  support  the  peerages  which  had  thus 
been  created.  "The  far  greater  part  of  the  peers,"  wrote  Queen 
Caroline  to  George  IV  in  1820,  "hold  by  themselves  and  their 
families  offices,  pensions,  and  emoluments,  solely  at  the  will  and 
pleasure  of  your  Majesty.  There  are  more  than  four-fifths  of 
the  peers  in  this  situation ! "  "More  than  half  of  the  present  House 
of  Lords,"  said  Wilberforce  in  1811,  "has  been  created  or  gifted 
with  their  titles  since  I  came  into  Parliament  in  1780."  "No 
great  thinkers,  no  great  writers,  no  great  orators,  no  great  states- 
men, none  of  the  true  nobility  of  the  land,  were  to  be  found  among 
the  spurious  nobles  created  by  George  III."  They  consisted 
chiefly  of  "mere  lawyers"  and  "country  gentlemen  remarkable 
for  nothing  but  their  wealth,  and  the  number  of  votes  their  wealth 
enabled  them  to  control." 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Porritt,  The  Unreformed  House  of  Commons.  May,  Constitutional  His- 
tory  of  England,  consult  index  under  titles  "  Parliament,  "  and  "  Commons." 
Lecky,  History  of  England,  consult  index  under  the  title  "  Parliament. " 
Kent,  The  English  Radicals.  Daly,  The  Dawn  of  Radicalism. 


CHAPTER   II 

THE    REFORM    BILL    OF    1832 

THE  undemocratic  and  curious  political  conditions  described 
in  the  previous  chapter  had  long  been  the  subject  of  comment  by 
statesmen  and  philosophers  ;  in  Cromwell's  time  an  attempt  had 
been  made  at  Parliamentary  reform  by  giving  representatives  to 
larger  towns  and  striking  small  boroughs  from  the  list.  This 
reform,  which  Clarendon  thought  worthy  of  a  better  time,  was 
cancelled  on  the  accession  of  the  Stuarts.  From  the  middle  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  however,  Parliamentary  reform  was  the  sub- 
ject of  agitation.  After  the  close  of  the  Napoleonic  wars  the 
contest  for  reform  was  continued  with  almost  revolutionary  fervor, 
and  in  1830  it  became  apparent  to  the  governing  classes  that 
further  opposition  was  dangerous.  Wellington,  the  great  cham- 
pion of  the  old  order,  was  forced  to  resign  in  favor  of  the  Grey 
ministry  dominated  by  Whigs  and  moderates. 

§  i.   Introduction  of  the  Reform  Bill  by  Lord  John  Russell  * 

The  Cabinet  decided  that  the  Reform  Bill  should  be  introduced 
by  Russell,  the  paymaster  of  the  forces.  Various  reasons  induced 
them  to  arrive  at  this  decision.  Russell  had  for  more  than  ten 
years  actively  promoted  the  reform  of  Parliament.  A  bill  which 
was  brought  forward  on  his  responsibility  was,  therefore,  sure  of 
favorable  consideration  from  the  Reformers.  Russell,  moreover, 
was  a  younger  son  of  the  Duke  of  Bedford ;  the  duke  was  one  of 
the  largest  territorial  magnates  in  the  country;  he  was  the  pro- 
prietor of  rotten  boroughs,  and  a  bill  recommended  by  his  son's 
authority  was  likely  to  reassure  timid  or  wavering  politicians. 
Something  was,  indeed,  necessary  to  infuse  spirit  into  the  hearts 

1  Walpole,  History  of  England  since  181$,  Vol.  Ill,  chap.  xi.  By  per- 
mission of  Longmans,  Green,  &  Company,  Publishers. 

549 


550  English  Historians 

of  the  Reformers  in  Parliament.  Outside  the  House  a  crowd  of 
people,  anxiously  collected  throughout  the  greater  portion  of  the 
day,  testified  their  anxiety  for  the  success  of  the  measure  which 
was  about  to  be  introduced.  But  inside  the  House,  Russell  was 
confronted  by  a  compact  body  of  Tories,  anxious  to  learn  what  the 
ministry  were  about  to  propose,  but  ready  to  forget  their  own 
differences  in  their  dislike  for  all  reform.  Those  who  had  expected 
a  great  declamatory  speech  from  the  introducer  of  the  measure 
were  disappointed.  Russell  told  his  tale  in  the  plainest  language. 
But  the  tale  which  he  had  to  tell  required  no  extraordinary  elo- 
quence to  adorn  it.  The  Radicals  had  not  dared  to  expect,  the 
Tories,  in  their  wildest  fears,  had  not  apprehended,  so  complete 
a  measure.  Enthusiasm  was  visible  on  one  side  of  the  House; 
consternation  and  dismay  on  the  other.  At  last,  when  Russell 
read  the  list  of  boroughs  which  were  doomed  to  extinction,  the 
Tories  hoped  that  the  completeness  of  the  measure  would  insure 
its  defeat.  Forgetting  their  fears,  they  began  to  be  amused,  and 
burst  into  peals  of  derisive  laughter. 

§  2.  Debate  on  the  BUI 

Men  of  large  experience  believed  that  if  Peel  had  risen  the 
moment  Russell  sat  down,  and  had  declined  to  discuss  a  bill 
which  was  not  a  measure  of  "reform  but  of  revolution,"  the  House 
would  have  refused  to  allow  the  bill  to  be  introduced.  It  is  very 
unlikely,  however,  that  such  a  result  would  have  ensued.  Tory 
members,  like  Inglis,  had  come  down  to  the  House  primed  with 
arguments  to  prove  that  little  fishing  villages  in  Cornwall  were 
better  qualified  to  return  members  than  the  great  manufacturing 
towns  of  Yorkshire  and  Lancashire.  Tory  members,  like  Inglis, 
who  had  searched  through  Camden  and  Hatsell,  Henry  and  Rapin, 
Hallam  and  Burke,  who  had  telling  quotations  in  their  pockets 
from  Home  Tooke's  writings  and  Canning's  speeches,  would  hardly 
have  consented  to  waste  all  their  labor  by  smothering  the  new-born 
infant  in  the  hour  of  its  birth.  The  House,  instead  of  dividing, 
talked  through  the  night  and  adjourned  till  the  morrow.  The 
debate,  thus  adjourned,  was  protracted  over  seven  nights;  but 
every  fresh  adjournment  strengthened  the  hands  of  the  ministry 
and  weakened  those  of  the  Opposition.  The  measure,  which  had 
excited  derision  in  the  House,  was  received  with  enthusiasm  out 
of  doors.  Resolutions  supporting  the  bill  were  passed  at  monster 
meetings  in  all  the  large  towns.  Moderate  members,  warned  by 


The  Reform  Bill  of  1832  551 

the  attitude  of  the  country,  declined  to  commit  themselves  to  an  un- 
compromising opposition  to  it;  and  the  bill,  which  might  possibly 
have  been  thrown  out  on  the  ist  of  March,  was  read  a  first  time 
without  a  division  on  the  gth. 

The  Tories,  however,  had  neither  reconciled  themselves  to  the 
bill  nor  withdrawn  their  opposition  to  it.  The  second  reading 
was  fixed  for  Monday,  the  2ist  of  March.  On  the  preceding 
Friday  the  government  was  defeated  on  the  timber  duties,  and  the 
thoroughness  of  the  defeat  raised  the  drooping  spirits  of  the  Oppo- 
sition. Ministers,  indeed,  hoped  for  a  considerable  majority  upon 
the  second  reading;  but,  like  prudent  men,  they  desired  to  prepare 
for  the  consequences  of  defeat,  and  to  obtain  the  king's  permission, 
in  that  contingency,  to  dissolve  Parliament.  The  king,  however, 
shrank  from  the  proposal  to  appeal  to  an  excited  population,  and 
could  not  bring  himself  to  face  the  consequences  of  a  general 
election  either  in  England  or  in  Ireland.  Ministers  failed  to  ob- 
tain the  permission,  which  they  again  and  again  urged  him  to 
give  them.  Happily,  however,  dissolution  at  that  stage  did  not 
become  necessary.  After  two  nights'  debate  the  bill  was  read  a 
second  time  by  302  votes  to  301,  or  by  a  narrow  majority  of  one. 
The  pressure  of  public  opinion  had  thus  defeated  the  united  efforts 
of  all  the  boroughmongers.  The  representatives  of  great  con- 
stituencies, like  Sir  Thomas  Acland,  the  member  for  Devonshire, 
and  Mr.  Wilson  Patten,  who  had  lately  been  returned  for  Lan- 
cashire, felt  the  full  force  of  the  popular  movement,  and  voted  for 
the  bill.  Even  Charles  Wynn,  who  had  been  frightened  by  the 
immensity  of  the  scheme  into  resigning  his  office  in  the  ministry, 
silently  supported  it;  and  the  necessity  for  the  dissolution  was  for 
the  moment  avoided. 

§  3.   Defeat  of  the  Government  and  Dissolution 

The  majority  by  which  the  bill  had  been  read  a  second  time  was 
so  small  that  the  ministry  could  hardly  hope  to  carry  the  measure 
through  its  later  stages.  Prudent  men,  who  disliked  reforrn, 
but  dreaded  the  alternative  of  a  popular  commotion,  hoped  that 
the  bill  might  be  silently  rejected  by  an  adverse  division  in  com- 
mittee. The  bill,  however,  was  not  destined  to  survive  to  this 
stage.  Gascoyne,  the  member  for  Liverpool,  proposed  a  pre- 
liminary resolution  that  the  number  of  representatives  in  England 
and  Wales  should  not  be  diminished.  It  was  obvious  that  the 
whole  strength  of  the  Tory  party  would  rally  in  Gascoyne's  sup- 


552  English  Historians 

port,  and  the  ministry  accordingly  decided  to  meet  the  motion  by 
a  slight  concession.  Five  boroughs  were  taken  out  of  Schedule  A 
and  transferred  to  Schedule  B.  Seven  boroughs  were  taken  out 
of  Schedule  B.1  Eight  counties  and  seven  large  towns  were  given 
an  additional  member,  and  additional  members  were  awarded  to 
Ireland  and  to  one  other  large  town.  But  these  concessions  did 
not  conciliate  the  Opposition.  Men  like  Sir  Thomas  Acland,  Mr. 
Wilson  Patten,  and  Charles  Wynn,  who  had  supported  the  gov- 
ernment on  the  second  reading,  ventured  on  opposing  it  on  Gas- 
coyne's  motion,  and  the  ministry  was  accordingly  defeated  by 
299  votes  to  291. 

This  division,  which  took  place  on  the  igth  of  April,  proved 
fatal  to  the  Reform  Bill  and  to  the  Parliament  of  1830.  The 
Cabinet,  on  the  following  morning,  decided  on  recommending  a 
dissolution.  The  king,  after  four-and-twenty  hours'  considera- 
tion, gave  his  consent  to  it.  The  ministers  at  once  announced 
that  the  bill  would  not  be  proceeded  with,  and  endeavored  to  go 
on  with  the  ordinary  business  of  the  evening.  The  Opposition, 
however,  declined  to  enter  into  the  discussion  of  the  estimates, 
which  happened  to  be  before  the  House,  and  raised  a  confused 
and  desultory  debate  on  reform.  The  night  wore  away;  supply 
had  not  been  granted;  and  the  Opposition,  showing  no  signs  of 
concession,  moved  the  adjournment  of  the  debate.  The  motion 
was  met  with  all  the  resistance  which  ministers  could  offer  to  it; 
but  the  defeat  of  the  previous  evening  had  lessened  their  influence. 
They  were  beaten  by  164  votes  to  142,  and  the  adjournment  was 
consequently  carried. 

The  division  hastened  the  dissolution,  which  in  any  event  would 
have  taken  place.  Before  the  debate  was  closed  Althorp  sent 
word  to  Grey  that  the  supplies  could  not  be  obtained,  and  that, 
in  his  opinion,  the  dissolution  ought  to  take  place  at  once.  Grey 
happened  to  be  dining,  with  several  other  members  of  the  Cabinet, 
with  his  son-in-law,  Durham.  A  council  was  immediately  held, 
at  which  it  was  decided  to  act  on  Althorp's  advice.  A  messenger 
was  at  once  sent  to  the  king;  and  the  king,  on  the  same  evdning, 
approved  the  dissolution.  Orders  were  accordingly  given  to  the 
clerk  of  the  council  directing  him  the  next  day  to  bring  to  the  palace 
the  papers  which  are  required  when  Parliament  is  to  be  dissolved 
by  commission.  But,  on  the  following  morning,  the  Cabinet  dis- 

1  Schedule  A  contained  a  list  of  boroughs  completely  disfranchised ; 
Schedule  B  those  semi-disfranchised. 


The  Reform   Bill  of  1832  553 

covered  that  this  arrangement  would  not  be  satisfactory.  Lord 
Wharncliffe  had  given  notice  of  a  motion  for  an  address  to  the 
crown  against  a  dissolution.  The  Opposition  peers  had  made  up 
their  minds  to  carry  this  address,  and  the  ministry  was  equally 
desirous  to  prevent  its  adoption.  If  Parliament,  however,  were 
prorogued  by  commission,  the  adoption  of  the  address  could  not 
be  prevented.  Before  admitting  the  commissioners  the  House  of 
Lords  was  entitled  to  dispose  of  the  business  before  it;  and  the 
Opposition  peers  could  not,  therefore,  be  stopped,  unless  the  king 
himself  consented  to  dissolve  Parliament  in  person.  Fortunately 
for  the  ministry,  the  king's  consent  was  easily  procured.  However 
much  he  had  originally  disliked  the  proposal  for  a  dissolution,  he 
disliked  much  more  the  attempt  which  was  to  be  made  in  the  House 
of  Lords  to  interfere  with  his  prerogative  to  dissolve.  He  declared 
that  he  would  go  himself  at  once;  that,  if  his  carriages  could  not 
be  got  ready,  he  would  go  in  a  hackney-coach.  Trumpery  diffi- 
culties, raised  by  some  of  his  household,  about  preparing  the  state 
carriages  and  plaiting  the  horses'  manes,  might  have  proved  im- 
passable mountains  in  the  reign  of  George  —  they  were  only 
molehills  in  the  reign  of  William. 

On  the  afternoon  on  which  the  dissolution  took  place  the  House 
of  Lords  met  at  two,  the  House  of  Commons  at  half-past  two. 
The  impending  dissolution  had  just  become  known,  and  both 
houses  were  the  scene  of  disorder  and  confusion  rarely  witnessed 
in  Parliament.  In  the  House  of  Commons  the  violence  was  suffi- 
ciently marked.  In  the  House  of  Lords  the  peers  were  nearly 
coming  to  blows.  Wharncliffe  had  barely  time  to  read  his  motion 
before  his  speech  was  stopped  by  shouts  of  "The  king  !"  Brougham 
increased  the  uproar  by  angrily  declaring  that  the  House  of  Com- 
mons had  thought  fit  to  take  the  extreme  and  unprecedented  step 
of  refusing  the  supplies.  The  complaint  only  increased  the  anger 
of  the  Tories.  Brougham  was  hooted.  Londonderry  shook  his 
fist  at  Richmond.  The  peeresses  who  had  come  to  look  at  the 
king  trembled  in  the  gallery.  The  king  himself,  alarmed  at  the 
uproar,  hesitated  for  a  moment  to  enter  the  House.  Brougham, 
however,  easily  persuaded  him  that  the  indecorous  uproar  would 
be  hushed  by  his  presence.  He  came,  and  told  his  turbulent 
legislators  that  he  had  come  to  prorogue  the  Parliament,  with  a 
view  to  its  immediate  dissolution. 


554  English  Historians 


§  4.   The  Election  and  the  New  Parliament 

The  consternation  of  the  Opposition  at  the  sudden  dissolution 
of  the  Parliament  of  1830  was  exceeded  by  the  enthusiasm  which 
was  created  by  the  news  of.it  in  the  country:  London  was  illumi- 
nated; Tory  peers  had  their  windows  broken  by  the  mob;  and 
even  the  great  services  of  Wellington  did  not  protect  Apsley 
House  from  damage.  Every  one  was  required  to  illuminate,  and 
duke  or  citizen  who  failed  to  manifest  his  participation  in  the 
universal  elation  had  to  pay  the  penalty  for  his  indifference  to  the 
general  rejoicing.  The  illumination  of  the  streets  of  London  was, 
however,  only  one  symptom  of  the  general  excitement.  From 
John-o'-Groat's  to  the  Land's  End  a  cry  was  raised  of  "The 
bill,  the  whole  bill,  and  n/^hinp  b,u*  the  b^ll."  Printed  lists  were 
circulated,  stating  the  manner  in  which  each  member  had  voted 
on  Gascoyne's  motion.  Every  one  who  had  directly  or  indirectly 
opposed  reform  incurred  the  full  animosity  of  the  populace. 
Gascoyne  himself  was  defeated  at  Liverpool;  Sir  Robert  Wilson, 
an  ardent  Reformer  on  most  points,  lost  his  seat  at  Southwark  for 
having  supported  Gascoyne.  County  members  like  Vyvyan,  the 
member  for  Cornwall,  Knatchbull,  the  member  for  Kent,  and 
Bankes,  the  member  for  Dorsetshire,  were  replaced  by  Reformers. 
Even  the  influence  of  the  boroughmongers  was  lost  in  the  crisis. 
For  the  first  time  Newcastle  found  himself  unable  to  do  what  he 
liked  with  his  own.  His  candidates  were  defeated  at  Newark, 
at  Bassetlaw,  and  in  Nottinghamshire.  Lonsdale  proved  almost 
equally  powerless  in  Cumberland.  The  mighty  force  of  popular 
opinion,  bursting  the  bonds  by  which  it  had  been  controlled,  swept 
political  power  out  of  the  hands  of  the  boroughmongers  and 
transferred  it  to  the  people. 

The  general  election  which  thus  took  place  in  the  summer  of 
1831  in  reality  completed  the  triumph  of  the  Reformers.  The 
legislature  had  still  to  register  the  verdict  of  the  country,  but  it 
had  not  the  slightest  chance  of  reversing  it.  ... 

The  new  Parliament  was  formally  opened  on  the  aist  of  June. 
Three  days  afterwards,  on  the  24th  of  June,  Russell  introduced 
the  second  Reform  Bill.  But  his  position  had  been  materially 
altered  since  he  had  been  intrusted  with  the  original  bill,  nearly 
four  months  before.  His  services  had  been  properly  rewarded  by 
his  admission  to  the  Cabinet.  His  courage  had  been  proportion- 
ately raised  by  the  enthusiasm  and  strength  of  his  supporters. 


The  Reform  Bill  of  1832  555 

He  no  longer  spoke  with  the  hesitation  and  diffidence  which  had 
marked  his  introduction  of  the  original  Reform  Bill.  But  he  had 
no  concessions  to  offer.  The  country  had  demanded  the  bill,  the  \ 
whole  bill,  and  nothing  but  the  bill ;  and  the  ministry  had  decided  \ 
on  the  re-introduction  of  the  bill  without  material  amendment. 
Fifty-four  boroughs  had  been  doomed  to  disfranchisement,  forty- 
four  boroughs  to  semi-disfranchisement,  in  the  latest  edition  of 
the  original  bill.  The  new  bill  proposed  the  disfranchisement  of 
fifty-seven  boroughs  and  the  semi-disfranchisement  of  forty  others. 
Both  bills,  therefore,  contemplated  the  same  measure  of  disfran- 
chisement. Both  bills  proposed  the  enfranchisement  of  the  same 
great  towns.  The  ministry  had,  therefore,  adhered  to  all  the 
salient  features  of  their  original  plan.  The  Opposition  was  no 
longer  able,  however,  to  pursue  its  previous  tactics.  In  March 
the  motion  for  the  introduction  of  the  bill  had  been  carried  after 
seven  nights'  debate;  the  second  reading  had  been  carried  after 
two  nights'  debate  by  a  majority  of  only  one.  In  June  leave  for 
the  introduction  of  the  bill  was  granted  after  one  night's  discussion, 
and  the  second  reading  was  carried  on  the  morning  of  the  8th  of 
July  by  a  majority  of  one  hundred  and  thirty-six. 

The  majority  was  so  large,  the  enthusiasm  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons was  so  great,  that  the  ministry  might  fairly  hope  for  the  rapid 
passage  of  the  measure  through  its  future  stages.  The  Opposi- 
tion, however,  exhausted  the  forms  of  Parliament  to  delay  a  pro- 
posal which  it  was  no  longer  doubtful  that  it  was  unable  to  defeat. 
On  the  1 2th  of  July,  Russell  moved  that  the  House  should  go  into 
committee  upon  the  bill.  The  committee  lasted  for  forty  nights 
and  did  not  conclude  its  labors  till  the  7th  of  September.  No 
material  alterations  in  the  measure  were  effected  by  the  committee. 
The  old  borough  of  Saltash  was  transferred  from  Schedule  A  to 
Schedule  B.  Ashton  and  Stroud  were  each  given  a  member; 
two  Welsh  counties,  Carmarthen  and  Denbigh,  an  additional  mem- 
ber each;  and  the  right  of  voting  was  extended,  on  the  motion  of 
Lord  Chandos,  to  ^50  occupiers  in  counties.  These  slight  altera- 
tions hardly  rewarded  the  Opposition  for  its  persistent  labors. 
Night  after  night  had  been  wasted  with  an  objectless  discussion, 
which  only  irritated  the  country  and  wearied  the  government. 
On  the  first  of  the  forty  nights,  motions  for  adjournment  were 
again  and  again  repeated,  and  the  Opposition  did  not  finally  give 
way  till  eight  o'clock  on  the  following  morning.  Happily  for  the 
comfort  of  the  legislature,  the  example  which  was  thus  set  by  an 
irritated  minority  was  not  followed  for  another  forty-six  years. 


556  English  Historians 

Delay  was  hardly  tolerated  within  the  walls  of  Parliament. 
Outside  the  walls  of  Parliament  the  people  watched  with  ill- 
disguised  impatience  the  tactics  of  the  Opposition.  They  could 
not  understand  why  the  discussion  of  a  measure  which  was  accept- 
able to  a  large  majority  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  to  nine 
men  out  of  every  ten  in  the  country,  should  be  protracted  over  forty 
nights.  At  the  commencement  of  August  the  Birmingham  Political 
Union  marked  its  sense  of  the  delays  by  petitioning  the  House  to 
accelerate  the  passage  of  the  bill.  The  House  declined  to  accept 
the  petition  which  complained  of  "a  factious  and  puerile  opposi- 
tion" by  "a  small  and  interested  minority."  But  the  petition, 
though  it  was  rejected,  did  its  work.  The  committee  steadily 
applied  itself  to  the  details  of  the  measure.  A  proposal,  made  by 
Hunt,  for  the  enfranchisement  of  all  ratepayers,  was  defeated  by 
a  majority  of  123  votes  to  i ;  a  suggestion  by  Hume  for  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  colonies  was  rejected  without  a  division.  On  the 
7th  of  September  the  bill  was  reported ;  on  the  i3th  the  report  was 
considered;  on  the  igth  the  bill  was  read  a  third  time  without 
discussion;  and  finally,  on  the  2ist  of  September,  it  was  passed, 
after  three  nights'  debate,  by  345  votes  to  236.  .  .  . 

§  5.    The  Bill  in  the  House  of  Lords 

The  satisfaction  which  the  coronation  gave  probably  facilitated 
the  progress  of  the  Reform  Bill  through  its  later  stages  in  the  House 
of  Commons.  But  the  recollection  of  the  gay  scene  was  effaced 
before  the  bill  reached  the  House  of  Lords  on  the  22nd  of  Septem- 
ber. The  formal  proceedings  which  are  customary  when  a  bill  is 
carried  from  one  house  to  the  other  were,  on  this  occasion,  watched 
with  breathless  anxiety;  and  the  Commons,  instead  of  retiring 
from  the  bar,  waited  till  the  second  reading  of  the  bill  had  been 
fixed  for  Monday,  the  3rd  of  October.  The  debate  which  com- 
menced on  that  day  was  one  of  the  most  memorable  which  had 
ever  occurred  in  the  House  of  Lords.  It  was  opened  by  a  minister 
who  was  able  to  avow  that  he  stood  before  their  lordships  "the 
advocate  of  principles  from  which"  he  had  "never  swerved,"  and 
that  he  was  only  proposing  in  his  old  age  the  measure  which  he 
had  promoted  in  his  youth.  Grey's  commanding  eloquence  had 
never  been  exerted  with  more  effect  than  in  this  debate.  Chan- 
cellor and  ex-chancellor  vied  with  each  other,  towards  the  close  of 
it,  in  speeches  of  unusual  power.  Brougham  actually  supplicated 
his  brother  peers  on  his  knees  to  pass  the  bill.  Consummate  actor 


The   Reform   Bill  of  1832  557 

that  he  was,  he  made  the  common  mistake  of  overacting  his  part, 
and  became  ridiculous  when  he  intended  to  be  sublime.  Lynd- 
hurst,  in  a  speech  of  marked  ability,  replied  to  Brougham's  dec- 
lamation; and  after  a  few  desultory  speeches  from  dukes  and 
prelates,  and  an  eloquent  reply  from  Grey,  the  peers  rejected  the 
second  reading  of  the  measure  by  199  votes  to  158. 

The  memorable  division  took  place  about  six  o'clock  in  the 
morning  on  Saturday,  the  8th  of  October.  The  newspapers,  a 
few  hours  afterwards,  announced  it  to  the  discontented  capital. 
The  Chronicle  and  the  Sun  appeared  in  mourning.  The  Times, 
in  its  short  leading  article,  declared  that  it  turned  from  "the  appall- 
ing sight  of  a  wounded  nation  to  the  means  already  in  action  for 
recovery."  The  means  were  sufficiently  formidable.  The  Com- 
mon Council  of  the  city  at  once  met  in  support  of  the  measure. 
Those  members  of  the  House  of  Commons  who  had  supported 
the  bill  passed  a  vote  of  confidence  in  the  government.  London, 
however,  appeared  apathetic  when  its  action  was  contrasted  with 
that  of  the  country.  The  news  of  the  division  reached  Birming- 
ham at  five  o'clock  in  the  afternoon.  The  bells  were  immediately 
muffled  and  tolled.  The  mob  at  Derby,  irritated  at  the  announce- 
ment, broke  out  into  open  riot.  The  jail  at  Nottingham  was 
burnt  down.  Two  troops  of  Kentish  yeomanry  tendered  their 
resignation  because  their  commanding  officers,  Lord  Sydney  and 
Lord  Winchilsea,  had  voted  against  the  bill;  and  meetings  were 
held  in  almost  every  county  to  support  the  government. 

§  6.   Macaulay's  Speech  on  Reform 

There  was,  however,  one  satisfaction  for  the  Reformers.  The 
Chronicle  had  assured  them,  in  its  black-edged  columns,  that  "the 
triumph  of  the  wicked  does  not  endure  forever,"  and  the  triumph 
of  the  Opposition  promised  to  be  equally  short-lived.  The  House 
of  Commons  had  hardly  reassembled  on  the  Monday  before 
Ebrington  proposed  a  resolution  lamenting  the  fate  of  the  Reform 
Bill,  and  expressing  unabated  confidence  in  the  ministry.  The 
motion  was  resisted  by  Goulburn,  on  the  part  of  the  Opposition. 
But  neither  Ebrington  nor  Goulburn  succeeded  in  instilling  any 
enthusiasm  into  the  House.  Among  the  more  recent  additions 
to  the  House  of  Commons,  however,  there  was  a  young  orator 
whose  eloquence  was  equal  to  his  ardor,  and  whose  ardor  was 
stimulated  by  his  knowledge.  Thomas  Babington  Macaulay  was 
born  in  1800.  He  entered  Parliament  for  Lord  Lansdowne's 


558  English  Historians 

borough  of  Calne  in  February,  1830.  He  only  spoke  twice  during 
the  memorable  session  which  was  abruptly  concluded  by  the  death 
of  George  IV.  He  had  done  nothing  which  gave  him  any  right 
to  expect  office  in  Grey's  ministry,  and  when  the  Whig  administra- 
tion was  formed,  his  claims  were  overlooked.  Yet  the  introduction 
of  the  Reform  Bill  raised  him  at  once  to  eminence.  His  first 
speech  on  the  second  reading  of  the  first  bill  reminded  the  older 
members  who  heard  it  of  the  days  of  Fox,  Pitt,  and  of  Canning. 
His  next  speech,  on  the  second  reading  of  the  second  bill,  con- 
firmed the  great  impression  which  his  first  speech  had  made.  He 
rose  after  Goulburn  to  support  Ebrington's  motion.  Goulburn 
had  endeavored  to  limit  the  debate  to  a  discussion  of  the  measures 
of  the  government,  —  the  timber  duties,  the  coal  duties,  the  sugar 
duties.  Macaulay  brushed  away  the  cobwebs  which  Goulburn  had 
woven  as  mere  trifling  and  recalled  the  House  to  the  one  subject 
which  was  before  it:  "At  the  present  moment  I  can  see  only  one 
question  in  the  State  —  the  question  of  reform ;  only  two  parties 
—  the  friends  of  the  bill  and  its  enemies.  .  .  .  The  public 
enthusiasm  is  undiminished.  Old  Sarum  has  grown  no  bigger; 
Manchester  has  grown  no  smaller.  ...  I  know  only  two  ways 
in  which  societies  can  be  governed,  —  by  public  opinion  and  by 
the  sword.  A  government  having  at  its  command  the  armies, 
the  fleets,  and  the  revenues  of  Great  Britain  might  possibly  hoLl 
Ireland  by  the  sword.  So  Oliver  Cromwell  held  Ireland;  so 
William  the  Third  held  it;  so  Mr.  Pitt  held  it;  so  the  Duke  of 
Wellington  might  perhaps  have  held  it.  But  to  govern  Great 
Britain  by  the  sword  —  so  wild  a  thought  has  never,  I  will  venture 
to  say,  occurred  to  any  public  man  of  any  party.  But  if  not  by 
the  sword,  how  is  the  country  to  be  governed  ?  .  .  .  In  old  times, 
when  the  villeins  were  driven  to  revolt  by  oppression,  when  a  hun- 
dred thousand  insurgents  appeared  in  arms  on  Blackheath,  the 
king  rode  up  to  them  and  exclaimed,  'I  wUi  be  your  leader!' 
and  at  once  the  infuriated  multitude  kid  down  their  arms  and 
dispersed  at  his  command.  Herein  let  us  imitate  him.  Let  us 
say  to  our  countrymen:  'We  are  your  leaders.  Our  lawful 
power  shall  be  firmly  exerted  to  the  utmost  in  your  cause;  and 
our  lawful  power  is  such  that  it  must  finally  prevail.'  " 

Macaulay's  speech  had  the  merit  of  concentrating  the  attention 
of  his  audience  on  the  main  issue.  The  House,  aroused  by  it  into 
enthusiasm,  passed  Ebrington's  resolution  by  a  large  majority; 
and  the  ministry,  thus  supported  in  its  determination  to  persevere 
in  the  measure,  obtained  the  king's  assent  to  a  short  prorogation 


The  Reform  Bill  of  1832  559 

of  Parliament,  and  to  the  re-introduction  of  the  Reform  Bill,  with 
such  amendments  as  might  be  necessary,  after  the  conclusion  of 
the  recess.  The  country  was  partly  pacified  by  the  assurance  that 
the  ministry  intended  to  persevere.  But  the  Political  Unions  dis- 
played an  increasing  determination  to  intimidate  the  peers.  A 
vast  meeting,  which  was  said  to  have  consisted  of  one  hundred  and 
fifty  thousand  persons,  was  held  at  Birmingham;  resolutions 
were  passed  at  it  that  no  taxes  should  be  paid  if  the  Reform  Bill 
were  rejected ;  and  thanks  were  unanimously  voted  at  it  to  Althorp 
and  Russell.  In  the  midst  of  this  excitement,  and  the  angry 
feelings  which  it  generated,  Parliament  was  prorogued.  .  .  . 

§  7.  Introduction  of  the  Third  Reform  Bill 

During  the  whole  of  the  short  Parliamentary  recess  men  brooded 
over  the  prospects  of  the  coming  session.  Parliament,  which  had 
been  prorogued  on  the  2oth  of  October,  met  again  on  the  6th  of 
December.  Six  days  afterwards,  or  on  Monday  the  i2th,  Russell 
introduced  the  third  Reform  Bill.  The  third  Reform  Bill  was 
constructed  on  different  principles  from  either  of  its  predecessors. 
It  was  determined  to  disfranchise  wholly  fifty-six  boroughs,  return- 
ing one  hundred  and  eleven  members ;  it  was  decided  to  deprive 
thirty  other  boroughs  of  half  of  their  representatives.  The  boroughs 
which  were  marked  for  disfranchisement  were  selected  on  a  new 
principle.  Regard  was  paid  to  the  population  of  the  smaller 
towns,  the  number  of  houses  in  them,  and  the  amount  which  they 
respectively  paid  in  assessed  taxes.  From  these  various  sources 
the  list  of  the  condemned  boroughs  was  prepared.  The  change  of 
method,  however,  made  no  material  difference  in  Schedule  A. 
One  or  two  boroughs  escaped  disfranchisement ;  one  or  two  others 
were  added  to  the  list ;  but  Schedule  A  for  all  practical  purposes 
was  unaffected.  A  material  difference,  however,  was  made  in  Sched- 
ule B.  In  the  first  bill  forty-six  boroughs  had  been  included  in 
this  schedule.  In  the  second  bill  forty  boroughs,  which  were  subse- 
quently increased  to  forty-one,  were  named  in  it.  But  in  the  third 
bill  only  thirty  boroughs  were  selected  for  partial  disfranchise- 
ment. The  milder  measure  of  disfranchisement  was  possible, 
because,  in  another  respect,  the  ministry  had  modified  its  original 
scheme.  In  the  former  bills  it  had  contemplated  a  considerable 
reduction  in  the  number  of  the  House  of  Commons.  In  the  bill 
of  December  it  preserved  the  number  of  six  hundred  and  fifty- 
eight  members  which  had  composed  it  since  the  Irish  Union. 


560  English  Historians 

This  decision  enabled  the  Cabinet  not  merely  to  save  a  few  bor- 
oughs from  disfranchisement,  but  also  to  enfranchise  a  greater 
number  of  thriving  towns.  The  former  process  pacified  the  feel- 
ings of  the  Opposition ;  the  latter  undoubtedly  increased  the  effi- 
ciency of  the  measure. 

The  bill  which  was  thus  introduced  was  at  once  read  a  first 
time.  It  passed  its  second  reading  after  two  nights'  debate  on  the 
Friday  following  by  a  majority  of  exactly  two  to  one.  The  House, 
having  made  this  satisfactory  progress  with  the  measure,  adjourned 
for  the  Christmas  holidays  till  the  lyth  of  January.  After  the 
recess  twenty-two  nights'  work  enabled  the  government  to  carry 
the  bill  through  committee.  On  the  22nd  of  March  it  was  read  a 
third  time ;  and  finally,  on  the  23rd  of  March,  it  passed  the  House 
of  Commons  without  a  division. 

§  8.   Pressure  on  the  House  of  Lords 

One  branch  of  the  legislature  had  given  a  convincing  proof  of 
its  desire  for  reform ;  but  no  one  had  ever  questioned  the  fidelity 
of  the  House  of  Commons  to  the  cause  of  the  people.  The  second 
Reform  Bill  had  been  lost  through  the  action  of  the  peers,  and 
there  was  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  peers  had  modified  their 
views  on  the  subject.  There  was,  however,  one  way  by  which  the 
House  of  Lords  could  be  controlled.  The  king  had  the  undoubted 
right  to  create  any  number  of  peers;  and  a  majority  could,  of 
course,  be  converted  into  a  minority  by  the  process.  In  the  begin- 
ning of  September,  1831,  Brougham  had  desired  to  adopt  this 
remedy.  His  advice  had  been  supported  by  Durham  and  Graham, 
who  had  persistently  urged  it  on  their  colleagues.  The  king,  how- 
ever, had  the  strongest  possible  objection  to  the  suggestion.  Grey 
was  himself  opposed  to  it;  and  Althorp  shared  Grey's  objections 
to  any  large  creation  of  peers.  The  reluctance  of  Grey  and 
Althorp  to  swamp  the  peerage  by  a  considerable  addition  to  its 
numbers  induced  the  moderate  members  of  the  Cabinet  to  try  to 
effect  a  compromise  with  a  portion  of  the  Opposition.  There  were 
two  sections  of  the  Opposition  who,  for  different  reasons,  seemed 
capable  of  conversion.  In  the  first  place,  the  bishops  had,  almost 
without  exception,  voted  against  the  former  bill,  and  the  king 
thought  that  his  influence  might  induce  them  to  modify  their  views. 
In  the  next  place,  a  few  Tory  peers,  of  whom  Lord  Harrowby  and 
Lord  Wharncliffe  were  the  most  prominent,  were  profoundly  im- 
pressed with  the  dangers  inseparable  from  the  unconditional  re- 


The  Reform  Bill  of  1832  561 

jection  of  the  bill,  and  sincerely  anxious  to  conclude  a  compromise 
upon  it.  The  negotiations  which  were  attempted  with  these  objects 
were  not,  however,  successful.  The  king  failed  to  extract  a  prom- 
ise of  support  from  the  bishops,  and  the  demands  of  the  Waverers, 
as  the  moderate  peers  were  termed,  proved  inadmissible.  These 
failures  naturally  strengthened  the  hands  of  the  small  party  in  the 
Cabinet  who  desired  to  secure  the  success  of  the  bill  by  an  un- 
limited creation  of  peers.  .  .  . 

Brougham  declared  that  the  failure  of  the  ministry  to  make  peers 
was  interpreted  by  the  Tories  to  mean  that  the  king  declined  to 
create  them ;  and  he  suggested  that  this  belief  should  be  removed 
by  twelve  or  fifteen  creations,  and  by  the  promise  of  the  king  to 
sanction  further  creations  if  they  were  necessary.  The  Cabinet 
assented.  The  king  was  induced  to  give  a  reluctant  consent,  on 
the  condition  that  the  new  peerages  should  be  conferred,  with  few 
exceptions,  on  the  heirs  of  existing  peers;  and  he  was  ultimately 
prevailed  upon  to  withdraw  his  stipulation  that  the  new  creations 
should  not  exceed  twenty-one  in  number.  Rumors  of  this  ar- 
rangement were  soon  heard.  The  Waverers,  in  consequence  of 
them,  showed  an  increasing  disposition  to  arrange  terms  with  the 
government.  Harrowby  and  Wharncliffe  again  distinguished 
themselves  by  the  moderation  of  their  views,  and  by  their  desire 
to  conclude  some  compromise  acceptable  to  all  parties.  Greville, 
whose  position  at  the  Council  Office  had  secured  him  the  friend- 
ship of  all  parties,  exerted  himself  to  mediate  between  them.  An 
arrangement  was  at  last  concluded  by  which  a  majority  for  the 
second  reading  of  the  bill  was  secured,  on  condition  that  no  new 
peerages  should  be  created.  Harrowby  and  Wharncliffe  were  able 
to  assure  Grey  that  a  sufficient  number  of  votes  could  be  obtained 
for  the  second  reading  of  the  bill  on  this  understanding. 

The  bill  was  introduced  in  the  House  of  Lords  on  the  26th  of 
March.  The  Waverers  publicly  avowed  their  intention  of  sup- 
porting it.  Wellington  formally  declared  that  his  own  opinions 
were  unchanged,  and  the  bill  was  read  a  first  time  without  divi- 
sion. The  debate  on  the  second  reading,  which  commenced  on 
the  gth  of  April,  lasted  over  four  nights.  The  sun  had  risen  on 
the  morning  of  the  i4th  when  the  Lords  pronounced  their  decision 
on  the  principle  of  the  measure.  But  the  division  list  afforded  a 
decisive  proof  of  the  change  which  had  been  effected  in  the  views 
of  the  peers.  Seventeen  peers  who  had  voted  against  the  bill  of 
1831  voted  for  the  bill  of  1832.  Ten  who  had  voted  against  the 
bill  of  1831  stayed  away  from  the  division  in  1832;  and  twelve 


562  English  Historians 

others  who  had  been  absent  in  1831  supported  the  measure  of  1832. 
These  defections  from  the  ranks  of  the  Opposition  decided  the  fate 
of  the  measure.  The  bill  of  1831  had  been  lost  by  a  majority  of 
forty-one;  the  second  reading  of  the  bill  of  1832  was  carried  by  a 
majority  of  nine. 

The  news  of  the  great  division  was  everywhere  received  with 
satisfaction.  Reform  had  evidently  made  considerable  progress, 
and  its  ultimate  success  was  becoming  more  assured.  But  the 
satisfaction  with  which  the  decision  of  the  Lords  was  regarded 
was  not  shared  by  the  ministry.  The  majority  by  which  the  second 
reading  of  the  bill  had  been  carried  was  only  small,  and  no  reliance 
could  be  placed  on  the  future  votes  of  those  who  had  composed  it. 
The  ministry,  in  short,  could  have  no  chance  in  carrying  the 
measure  in  its  further  stages  without  creating  new  peers,  and  the 
peerage  question  presented  unexpected  difficulties.  The  king's 
feelings  respecting  the  Reform  Bill  had  gradually  undergone  a 
remarkable  change.  In  the  beginning  of  1831  he  had  given  a 
zealous  support  to  his  ministers ;  and  his  support  was  the  support 
of  a  man  who  thoroughly  understood  the  bill,  and  whose  voice  had 
been  heard  in  the  arrangement  of  its  details.  In  March,  1831,  he 
had  been  reluctantly  induced  to  face  the  possible  risks  of  a  dissolu- 
tion and  to  appeal  to  the  country.  But  the  necessity  for  a  dissolu- 
tion moderated  the  king's  ardor.  His  zeal  cooled  in  exact  pro- 
portion to  the  growing  warmth  of  the  country.  .  .  .  The  Tory 
papers  were  induced  to  declare  that  the  king  was  pledged  to  noth- 
ing beyond  the  second  reading  of  the  bill,  and  that  he  was  entirely 
indifferent  as  to  any  alteration  which  might  be  made  in  it  in 
committee. 

§  9.   Final  Attempt  to  Block  Reform 

These  reports,  industriously  circulated  in  every  quarter,  natu- 
rally increased  the  embarrassment  of  the  ministry.  Parliament, 
which  had  separated  for  the  Easter  recess,  did  not  re-assemble  till 
the  7th  of  May.  On  that  evening  Lyndhurst  moved  the  post- 
ponement of  the  clause,  disfranchising  the  boroughs  enumerated 
in  Schedule  A.  The  motion  was  carried  against  the  government 
by  151  votes  to  116,  and  Grey  at  once  deferred  the  further  con- 
sideration of  the  measure.  The  Cabinet  met  on  the  morning  of 
the  8th,  and  decided  on  "the  expediency  of  advancing  to  the  honor 
of  the  peerage  such  a  number  of  persons  as  might  insure  the  success 
of  the  bill  in  all  its  essential  principles."  The  king  was  verbally 
assured  by  Grey  and  Brougham,  who  were  charged  with  the  duty 


The  Reform  Bill  of  1832  563 

of  laying  the  decision  of  the  Cabinet  before  him,  that  at  least  fifty 
fresh  peerages  would  be  required.  The  king,  after  a  day's  con- 
sideration, declined  to  act  on  the  advice  of  his  ministers,  and  ac- 
cepted their  resignations.  On  the  same  day  he  sent  for  Lyndhurst, 
with  a  view  to  the  formation  of  a  new  administration. 

Lyndhurst  was  sitting  in  the  Court  of  Exchequer  when  the  king's 
commands  for  his  attendance  were  brought  to  him.  He  found  the 
king  desirous  of  carrying  a  measure  of  reform,  but  terrified  at  the 
extreme  counsels  of  his  Whig  ministry.  Lyndhurst  recommended 
him  to  form  an  administration  prepared  to  carry  a  moderate  Re- 
form Bill,  and  undertook  himself  to  conduct  a  negotiation  with  this 
object.  Charged  with  the  king's  commands,  Lyndhurst  at  once 
applied  to  Wellington.  Wellington  was  more  opposed  to  reform 
than  any  other  statesman.  But  Wellington's  political  conduct  was 
uniformly  governed  by  two  considerations.  He  always  considered 
what  was  practicable;  he  always  tried  to  ascertain  what  was  due 
to  his  sovereign.  It  was  no  longer  practicable,  in  1832,  to  defend 
the  uncompromising  position  which  he  had  taken  in  1830.  Reform 
was  necessary ;  and  a  mild  dose,  prescribed  by  the  Tories,  seemed 
preferable  to  the  strong  purge  recommended  by  their  opponents. 
Successful  with  Wellington,  Lyndhurst  turned  to  Peel.  But  Peel 
scornfully  rejected  the  notion  that  he  should  personally  carry  the 
measure  which  he  had  spent  day  and  night  for  a  year  and  a  half 
in  opposing.  Peel's  refusal,  either  to  take  the  highest  office  or  any 
office,  was  the  first  rebuff  which  Lyndhurst  received.  Peel's 
example  was  at  once  imitated  by  Goulburn  and  Croker;  and  these 
successive  refusals  made  the  formation  of  a  Tory  government  hope- 
less. Alexander  Baring,  indeed,  the  member  for  Callington,  a 
gentleman  of  some  experience  in  commercial  pursuits,  undertook 
to  perform  the  duties  of  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer.  Manners 
Sutton,  the  speaker,  promised  to  lead  the  House  of  Commons  and 
to  be  Secretary  of  State.  Experienced  politicians,  blinded  by 
their  own  prejudices,  imagined  that  a  government  in  a  minority 
in  the  House  of  Commons  —  with  no  first-rate,  and  even  no 
second-rate,  men  to  defend  it  in  that  House  —  had  a  chance  of 
moderating  the  passionate  hurricane  which  was  raging  in  the 
land. 

The  men,  however,  who  reposed  in  a  fancied  security  amidst  the 
strife  around  them  were  soon  subjected  to  a  rude  awakening.  On 
the  gth  of  May,  Grey  and  Althorp  announced  the  resignation  of 
the  Whig  ministry.  During  a  similar  crisis  in  the  previous  autumn 
Ebrington  had  come  forward  and  proposed  a  vote  of  confidence  in 


564  English   Historians 

the  administration.  On  the  xoth  of  May,  Ebrington  again  pro- 
posed an  address  to  the  crown  of  confidence  in  the  government. 
The  House,  on  the  same  evening,  adopted  the  address  by  a  majority 
of  eighty.  This  decision  naturally  increased  the  difficulties  of  the 
Tory  gentlemen  who  were  endeavoring  to  form  a  new  administra- 
tion. They  could  no  longer  affect  to  be  ignorant  of  the  opposition 
of  the  House  of  Commons.  But  the  decision  of  the  House  of 
Commons  formed  only  one  element  of  danger.  On  the  same  even- 
ing a  petition  was  presented  from  the  city  of  London  praying  the 
House  to  stop  the  supplies.  On  the  nth  a  similar  petition  was 
presented  from  Manchester.  It  was  notorious  that  petitions  with 
the  same  object  were  being  prepared  in  every  large  town.  Lord 
Milton  openly  admitted  that  he  had  desired  the  tax-gatherer  to  call 
again,  as  he  might  find  it  necessary  to  refuse  payment.  Men,  in 
their  passionate  excitement,  hastily  concluded  that  a  commercial 
crisis  would  be  preferable  to  the  fall  of  the  Grey  ministry.  A  run 
upon  the  Bank  of  England,  it  was  thought,  might  increase  the 
difficulties  of  the  situation  and  embarrass  the  Tory  government. 
"Go  for  gold,  and  stop  the  duke,"  was  the  advice  which  was 
placarded  on  every  bare  wall  in  the  metropolis. 

Every  moment  was  increasing  the  difficulties  of  the  duke.  On 
Monday,  the  i4th  of  May,  his  difficulties  became  insuperable.  A 
petition  was  presented  to  the  House  of  Commons  praying  that  the 
supplies  might  be  refused  till  the  Reform  Bill  had  become  a  law. 
A  violent  debate  ensued.  The  duke's  inconsistency  in  accepting 
office  was  criticised  by  Buncombe  on  one  side  of  the  House,  and 
by  Inglis  on  the  other.  Every  thrust  was  received  with  cheers  and 
counter-cheers;  and  the  overcrowded  House,  in  a  state  of  uncon- 
trolled excitement,  presented  a  scene  of  unparalleled  violence. 
Baring  spoke  again  and  again,  but  proved  unequal  to  the  task  of 
moderating  the  assembly.  Appalled  at  the  tempest  which  they 
had  provoked,  Sutton  and  Baring  repaired  to  Wellington  to  tell 
him  that  their  situation  was  impracticable.  On  the  following 
morning  the  duke  waited  on  the  king  and  advised  the  recall  of 
Grey. 

§  10.   Passage  of  the  Bill 

The  king  had  no  alternative  but  to  adopt  the  advice  which  the 
duke  thus  gave  him.  But  he  still  shrank  from  the  expedient, 
which  the  Whig  ministry  had  pressed  on  him,  of  an  unlimited 
creation  of  peers.  He  suggested  to  Grey  that  his  old  ministers 
might  return  to  office;  that  some  modifications  might  be  made  in 


The   Reform    Bill   of  1832  565 

the  bill;  and  that  the  measure  might  then  be  passed  with  the 
assistance  of  the  Tory  party.  Grey  replied  that  the  events  which 
had  taken  place  had  made  modifications  much  more  difficult,  and 
that  ministers  could  not  resume  office  "except  with  a  sufficient 
security  that  they  will  possess  the  power  of  passing  the  present 
bill  unimpaired  in  its  principle  and  its  essential  provisions,  and  as 
nearly  as  possible  in  its  present  form."  This  security,  the  ministry 
decided,  could  only  be  obtained  in  two  ways.  The  adversaries 
of  the  bill  might  cease  from  opposing  it,  or  their  opposition  might 
be  overcome.  The  former  alternative  appeared  impracticable; 
the  latter  pointed  to  a  large  creation  of  peers.  The  king,  still 
clinging  to  the  hope  that  an  addition  to  the  peerage  might  be 
avoided,  instructed  his  secretary,  Sir  Herbert  Taylor,  to  inform 
Wellington  that  all  difficulties  would  be  removed  by  "a  declaration 
in  the  House  of  Lords  from  a  sufficient  number  of  peers  that  they 
have  come  to  the  resolution  of  dropping  their  further  opposition 
to  the  Reform  Bill."  Wellington,  as  usual,  obeyed  the  king's 
commands.  He  withdrew  from  the  House,  and  he  was  accom- 
panied, in  withdrawing  from  it,  by  Lyndhurst  and  other  peers. 
But  the  seceders  prefaced  their  withdrawal  by  speeches  of  extreme 
violence,  and  tacitly  reserved  to  themselves  the  liberty  of  returning 
and  of  resuming  their  opposition  to  the  bill.  This  conduct  in- 
creased the  embarrassment  of  the  ministry.  The  Cabinet,  meeting 
the  next  day,  decided  that  its  continuance  in  office  must  depend 
on  their  receiving  "full  and  indisputable  security"  "for  insuring 
the  speedy  settlement  of  the  Reform  Bill."  The  king,  finding  that 
he  had  no  alternative  but  submission,  gave  the  requisite  authority. 
The  Cabinet  was  empowered,  if  it  should  be  necessary  to  do  so,  to 
create  an  unlimited  number  of  peers,  provided  that  the  eldest 
sons  of  peers  or  the  collateral  heirs  of  childless  noblemen  were 
first  summoned  to  the  House  of  Lords. 

The  king's  letter  had,  however,  done  its  work.  Wellington  and 
other  peers,  obeying  his  Majesty's  hint,  abstained  from  taking  any 
further  part  in  the  discussions  on  the  Reform  Bill.  The  Opposi- 
tion was,  of  course,  paralyzed  by  the  abstention  of  its  leaders. 
The  measure,  freed  from  any  serious  attack  upon  it,  made  rapid 
progress.  It  passed  through  committee  at  the  end  of  May;  it 
was  read  a  third  time  on  the  4th  of  June.  The  House  of  Com- 
mons immediately  afterwards  assented  to  the  slight  amendments 
which  had  been  introduced  in  the  Lords;  and  on  the  yth  of  June 
the  royal  assent  to  the  measure  was  given  by  commission. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE    TRIUMPH    OF    URBAN    DEMOCRACY 

THE  Reform  Bill  of  1832  did  little  to  meet  the  demands  of  the 
working  classes  for  the  right  to  vote,  and  more  than  thirty  years 
were  to  elapse  before  their  claim  to  the  franchise  was  conceded  by 
Parliament.  Their  violent  agitations  during  the  Chartist  mo\e- 
ment  were  without  avail,  but  some  yearsjater  the  rivalry  of  the 
great  political  parties  seeking  popular  support  led  t<>  tin-  in-t 
measure  which  granted  political  power  to  an  appreciable  portion 
of  the  propcrtyless  classes.  When  Earl  Russell  became  prime 
minister  in  1865,  the  signal  for  a  new  conflict  over  democracy  was 
given. 

§  i.    The  Political  Situation  and  the  New  Reform  BUI1 

That  the  government  of  Lord  Russell  would  introduce  a  Reform 
Bill  was  considered  on  all  hands  as  a  matter  of  course.  The  only 
questions  in  dispute  were  when  the  bill  would  be  brought  in,  and 
whether  it  would  be  a  big  bill  or  a  small  one.  Even  if  Lord  Russell 
and  Mr.  Gladstone  had  not  both  been  ardent  Reformers,  they 
could  hardly  dispense  with  the  support  of  the  Radicals,  and  that 
support,  as  Mr.  Bright  told  them  in  a  speech  at  Rochdale,  where 
he  lived,  would  depend  upon  their  earnestness  in  the  enfranchise- 
ment of  the  people.  All  through  the  north  of  England  public 
feeling  was  vehemently  excited,  and  numerous  meetings  were  held 
with  great  enthusiasm.  In  the  south,  on  the  other  hand,  compara- 
tive apathy  prevailed,  and  there  were  men  in  the  Cabinet,  such  as 
Lord  Clarendon  and  the  Duke  of  Somerset,  who  liked  reform  as 
little  as  their  departed  chief.  The  regular  Opposition  represented 
by  Lord  Derby  and  Mr.  Disraeli,  were  committed  to  the  principle 

1  Paul,  A  History  of  Modern  England.  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  22  5.  By  per- 
mission of  The  Macmillan  Company,  Publishers. 

'566 


The  Triumph   of  Urban   Democracy          567 

of  reform,  having  in  1859  introduced  a  Reform  Bill  themselves. 
But  they  were,  of  course,  entitled  to  treat  any  particular  scheme 
upon  its  merits,  and  to  accept  it  or  reject  it  accordingly. 

The  mention  of  the  subject  in  the  Queen's  Speech  was  unusual 
and  ambiguous.  .  .  .  But  ministers  were  better  than  their  words, 
and  on  the  i2th  of  March,  the  month  of  reform  bills,  Mr.  Glad- 
stone disclosed  the  scheme.  It  proved  to  be  mild  and  moderate 
indeed,  milder  and  more  moderate  than  even  the  bill  of  1860. 
The  county  franchise  would  be  reduced  from  a  rental  of  fifty  pounds 
to  a  rental  of  fourteen,  and  the  borough  franchise  from  a  rental  of 
ten  pounds  to  a  rental  of  seven.  Compound  householders,  for 
whom  their  landlords  "compounded,"  paying  their  rates  and 
charging  the  payment  in  the  rent,  were  to  be  on  the  same  footing 
with  other  householders,  and  there  would  be  a  lodger  franchise 
for  every  man  whose  lodgings  were  worth  ten  pounds  a  year  un- 
furnished. There  would  also  be  a  right  of  voting  conferred  by 
the  deposit  of  fifty  pounds  in  a  savings  bank  for  two  years,  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  laborers  in  the  dockyards  of  the  government 
would  be  disfranchised.  It  was  estimated  that  the  number  of 
electors  added  to  the  constituencies  by  the  bill  would  be  four 
hundred  thousand.  That  this  measure  should  have  been,  as  it 
was,  accepted  with  gratitude  by  the  Radicals,  is  strange. 

§  2.    Opposition  to  Mr.  Gladstone's  Measure 

That  it  should  have  roused  vehement  and  bitter  animosity 
would  be  still  stranger,  if  the  approval  of  Mr.  Bright  and  Mr. 
Mill  did  not  to  some  extent  account  for  the  opposition  of  Mr. 
Horsman  and  Mr.  Lowe.  That  opposition  was  declared  at  once. 
There  was  no  division  upon  the  first  reading  of  the  bill.  But  it 
was  debated  for  three  nights,  and  on  the  second  evening  Mr.  Lowe 
made  a  powerful  attack  upon  it,  which  was  received  with  enthu- 
siastic applause  by  the  Conservative  party.  Mr.  Gladstone  had 
not  thought  it  necessary  to  argue  in  favor  of  reform,  inasmuch  as 
five  administrations  in  six  Queen's  Speeches  had  pledged  them- 
selves to  a  reduction  of  the  franchise.  Mr.  Lowe  fastened  upon 
this  omission,  and  boldly  declared  that  the  House  of  Commons 
was  as  good  as  it  could  be.  Not  since  the  Duke  of  Wellington's 
celebrated  protest  in  1830  against  touching  the  ideal  symmetry 
of  the  British  Constitution  had  there  been  heard  in  Parliament 
a  more  emphatic  outburst  of  undiluted  Toryism.  Forgetting 
altogether  that  he  had  supported  as  a  member  of  the  government, 


568  English  Historians 

though  not  of  the  Cabinet,  the  Reform  Bill  of  1860,  he  declared  that 
he  did  not  envy  Mr.  Gladstone  the  glory  of  carrying  such  legislation. 
He  coveted  rather  the  fame  of  resisting  it  to  the  utmost  of  his  power. 
In  words  of  which  he  was  not  soon  to  hear  the  last,  he  said,  "  You 
have  had  the  opportunity  of  knowing  some  of  the  constituencies  of 
this  country,  and  I  ask,  if  you  want  venality,  ignorance,  drunken- 
ness, and  the  means  of  intimidation,  if  you  want  impulsive,  unre- 
flecting, and  violent  people,  where  will  you  go  to  look  for  them,  to 
the  top  or  the  bottom?"  Mr.  Lowe  always  denied  that  he  used 
this  language  of  the  working  classes  as  a  whole.  The  context, 
he  said,  showed  that  he  spoke  of  those  already  enfranchised. 
This  was  true,  but  it  was  a  quibble.  For  in  the  first  place,  Mr. 
Lowe  maintained,  contrary  to  the  evidence,  -that  the  best  of  the 
working  classes  were  enfranchised  already,  and,  in  the  second 
place,  his  illustration  had  no  meaning  unless  it  expressed  the 
danger  of  a  suffrage  which  admitted  them  in  larger  numbers. 
Mr.  Lowe  had  not  been  fortunate  in  his  experience  of  the  populace 
at  Kidderminster,  where  his  life  was  imperilled  by  the  violence 
of  the  mob.  He  now  represented  nominally  the  people  of  Calne, 
and  really  the  Marquess  of  Lansdowne.  .  .  . 

§  3.    The  Adullamites  and  Conservatives 

Next  to  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  and  the  member  for 
Calne  the  most  prominent  speaker  was  Mr.  Bright.  In  his  hap- 
piest vein,  and  with  his  raciest  humor,  he  compared  the  party  of 
Mr.  Lowe  and  Mr.  Horsman  with  the  Scotch  terrier,  so  covered  by 
hair  that  you  could  not  tell  which  was  the  head  and  which  was  the 
tail.  In  the  same  speech,  his  speech  on  the  first  reading,  he  made 
use  of  a  political  metaphor  which  has  not  been  staled  by  age  or 
withered  by  custom.  He  compared  Mr.  Horsman,  a  showy, 
shallow  person,  very  prominent  at  the  time,  with  the  Hebrew  chief 
who  gathered  round  him  in  the  cave  of  Adullam  every  one  that 
was  in  distress,  and  every  one  that  was  discontented.  The  Whig 
malcontents  were  at  once  christened  Adullamites,  and  a  group  of 
rebellious  politicians  have  ever  since  been  known  as  a  cave. 

The  Conservative  party  had  immediately  to  decide  whether  they 
would  join  forces  with  Mr.  Lowe  and  the  rest  of  the  Adullamites. 
They  were  not  long  in  making  up  their  minds.  On  the  i6th  of 
March  they  held  a  meeting  at  Lord  Salisbury's  house,  with  Lord 
Derby  in  the  chair,  and  determined  to  oppose  the  bill.  Four  days 
afterwards,  before  the  House  of  Commons  adjourned  for  the 


The  Triumph  of  Urban   Democracy         569 

Easter  recess,  Lord  Grosvenor  gave  notice  of  an  amendment  to 
the  second  reading,  which  objected  to  further  progress  with  an  in- 
complete scheme,  and,  to  show  the  unity  of  the  opposition  on  both 
sides  of  the  House,  it  was  announced  that  the  amendment  would 
be  seconded  by  Lord  Stanley.  In  other  words,  the  Conservatives 
and  Adullamites,  instead  of  meeting  the  proposals  of  the  govern- 
ment with  a  direct  negative,  fixed  upon  the  plausible  point  that 
reduction  of  the  franchise  should  be  accompanied  by  redistribu- 
tion of  seats.  .  .  . 

§  4.    The  Debate  between  Mr.  Gladstone  and  Mr.  Loive 

Thus,  when,  on  the  i2th  of  April,  the  debate  upon  the  second 
reading  of  the  bill  began,  the  omens  were  not  favorable  to  the 
government,  and  Mr.  Gladstone  found  it  desirable  to  meet  the 
Opposition  halfway.  He  undertook  that  before  going  into  com- 
mittee the  House  should  be  made  acquainted  with  the  whole  scheme 
of  reform,  including  the  Redistribution  Bill  and  the  bills  for  Scot- 
land and  Ireland.  But  to  Lord  Grosvenor's  amendment,  which 
called  for  this  disclosure  before  the  second  reading,  ministers  still 
objected,  and  upon  that  narrow  issue  the  trial  of  strength  was  nomi- 
nally held.  The  real  subject  of  discussion  was,  however,  the  bill 
itself,  and  the  real  speakers  were  two.  There  was  nothing  to 
prevent  the  opponents  of  the  measure  from  continuing  the  debate 
as  long  as  they  pleased,  and  they  were  pleased  to  continue  it  for 
eight  nights.  Lord  Grosvenor  was  merely  an  ornamental  figure- 
head. His  seconder,  Lord  Stanley,  intellectually  the  ablest  mem- 
ber of  the  Conservative  party,  stuck  to  his  text,  and  dwelt  upon  the 
risk  that  accident  might  assign  the  privilege  of  dealing  with  re- 
distribution to  a  new  and  more  democratic  Parliament.  The 
eloquence  of  Sir  Edward  Bulwer-Lytton  was  always  ready  to  flow 
with  equal  vehemence  and  volume  on  either  side  of  reform.  Sir 
Hugh  Cairns,  almost  alone  among  his  contemporaries,  spoke  with 
the  same  effect  as  a  statesman  and  as  a  lawyer.  Mr.  Disraeli, 
wary  and  adroit,  used  the  Adullamites  without  allowing  them  to 
use  him,  and  attacked  the  bill  while  he  kept  his  own  opinions  to 
himself. 

But  the  waves  of  time  have  long  since  obliterated  all  traces  of  this 
verbal  conflict,  except  the  memorable  duel  between  Mr.  Gladstone 
and  Mr.  Lowe.  Without  Lowe  the  cave  would  have  been  contemp- 
tible, and  the  Conservatives  would  have  allowed  the  second  read- 
ing to  pass  unchallenged.  He  was  the  brains  and  heart  of  the 


570  English   Historians 

Opposition.  Gladstone  had  the  advantage  of  being  able  to  make 
two  speeches,  whereas  Lowe  could  make  only  one.  But  in  his 
first  speech  the  minister  was  scrupulously  mild,  and  did  not  go 
beyond  entreating  the  House  of  Commons  to  be  "wise  in  time." 
The  combination  of  Lowe  and  Disraeli  was  required  to  draw  from 
him  the  most  magnificent  specimen  of  Parliamentary  eloquence 
which  the  oldest  member  of  Parliament  could  recollect.  In 
Lowe's  eyes  the  bill  was  the  first  step  on  the  downward  path  to 
that  democracy  which,  more  than  anything  else,  he  dreaded  and 
loathed.  He  held  up  as  a  warning  the  dangerous  power  of  Trade 
Unions,  and  showed,  in  language  which  must  have  given  some 
ground  for  reflection  to  Mill,  how  unsound  was  the  democratic 
finance  of  the  self-governing  colonies.  "Look  at  free  trade," 
he  cried.  "If  we  have  a  precious  jewel  in  the  world,  it  is  our  free- 
trade  policy.  It  has  been  everything  to  us.  With  what  eyes  do 
democracies  look  at  it?  ...  Canada  has  raised  her  duties 
enormously,  and  justified  them  upon  protectionist  principles.  The 
Prime  Minister  of  New  South  Wales  at  this  moment  is  a  strong 
protectionist.  The  ministry  in  Victoria  were  free  traders,  but  by 
the  will  of  the  people  they  have  become  converted,  and  have 
become  protectionists."  After  making  the  singularly  unfortunate 
prediction  that  responsible  government  in  France  could  not  coexist 
with  universal  suffrage,  he  concluded,  amid  the  enthusiastic  ap- 
plause of  the  party  opposite  to  which  he  sat,  "Surely  the  heroic 
work  of  so  many  centuries,  the  matchless  achievements  of  so  many 
wise  heads  and  strong  hands,  deserve  a  nobler  consummation  than 
to  be  sacrificed  at  the  shrine  of  revolutionary  passion  or  maudlin 
enthusiasm  of  humanity.  Uncoerced  by  any  external  force,  not 
borne  down  by  any  internal  calamity,  but  in  the  full  plethora  of 
our  wealth  and  the  surfeit  of  our  too  exuberant  prospcritv,  with 
our  own  rash  and  inconsiderate  hands  we  are  about  to  pluck  down 
on  our  own  heads  the  venerable  temple  of  our  liberty  and  our 
glory.  History  may  tell  of  other  acts  as  signally  disastrous,  but 
of  none  more  wanton,  none  more  disgraceful." 

This  powerful,  if  somewhat  extravagant,  harangue  was  deliv- 
ered on  the  26th  of  Anril.  When  at  one  o'clock  in  the  morning  of 
the  28th  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  rose  to  renlv,  a  crowded 
House,  eager  for  the  division  and  not  unmindful  of  repose,  was 
spellbound  for  two  hours  by  the  magic  of  his  words  as  he  reviewed 
with  consummate  dexterity  the  whole  course  of  the  debate.  Al- 
though he  followed  Disraeli,  his  real  antagonist  was  Lowe.  "At 
last,  sir,"  he  began,  in  an  abrupt  and  vigorous  exordium,  "we 


The  Triumph  of  Urban   Democracy          571 

have  obtained  a  clear  declaration  from  an  authoritative  source, 
and  we  now  know  that  a  bill  which  in  a  country  with  some  five 
millions  of  adult  males  proposes  to  add  to  the  present  limited  con- 
stituency two  hundred  thousand  of  the  middle  class,  and  two 
hundred  thousand  of  the  working  class,  is,  in  the  judgment  of 
the  leader  of  the  Tory  party,  a  bill  to  reconstruct  the  Constitution  on 
American  principles."  Mr.  Disraeli,  with  unusual  want  of  tact  and 
sense,  had  taunted  him  with  having  opposed  the  Reform  Bill  of  1^3 1 
in  the  Oxford  Union.  This  rather  absurd  gibe  gave  the  orator  an 
opportunity  of  explaining  his  political  growth.  "I  was  bred," 
he  told  the  House,  "under  the  shadow  of  the  great  name  of  Can- 
ning; every  influence  connected  with  that  name  governed  the  first 
political  impressions  of  my  childhood  and  my  youth ;  following  Mr. 
Canning,  I  rejoiced  in  the  removal  of  religious  disabilities  from  t  12 
Roman  Catholic  body,  and  in  the  free  and  truly  British  tone 
which  he  gave  to  our  policy  abroad;  following  Mr.  Canning,  I 
rejoiced  in  the  opening  he  boldly  and  wisely  gave  towards  the 
establishment  of  free  commercial  exchanges  between  nations ;  with 
Mr.  Canning,  and  under  the  attraction  of  that  great  name,  and 
under  the  influence  likewise  of  the  yet  more  venerable  name  of 
Burke,  I  own  that  my  youthful  mind  and  imagination  were  im- 
pressed with  those  same  idle  and  futile  fears  which  still  bewilder 
and  distract  the  mature  mind  of  the  right  honorable  gentleman." 
But  he  speedily  left  the  leader  of  the  Opposition  and  came  to  his 
leading  opponent.  With  Lowe's  academic  denunciations  of  the 
working  classes  he  contrasted  their  heroic  endurance  of  the  cotton 
famine  in  Lancashire.  Coming  to  close  quarters  with  Lowe's  so- 
called  dilemma,  Gladstone  denied  that  it  was  a  dilemma  at  all.  He 
answered  the  question  whether  he  thought  the  franchise  was  a 
good  thing  in  itself,  or  whether  he  wished  to  improve  the  insti- 
tutions of  the  country,  with  a  double  affirmative.  It  was  a  good 
thing,  and,  because  it  was  a  good  thing,  it  would  make  other  things 
better.  The  working  classes  were  worthy  of  enfranchisement, 
and  therefore  the  Cabinet  proposed  to  enfranchise  them.  Why 
should  that  reasonable  proposal  be  resisted  by  a  great  party? 
What  had  the  Conservatives  gained  by  opposing  Catholic  Eman- 
cipation, the  first  Reform  Bill,  the  repeal  of  the  Corn  Laws?  All 
these  measures  had  been  carried  in  spite  of  them,  and  since  1832  the 
Whigs  or  Liberals  had  been  in  power  for  at  least  five  years  out  of 
six.  Then,  raising  his  tone,  Mr.  Gladstone  was  bold  enough  to 
prophesy  that,  as  the  cause  was  above  the  men,  those  who  fought 
against  it  were  fighting  against  the  future.  "Time  is  on  our  side. 


572  English  Historians 

The  great  social  forces  which  move  onwards  in  their  might  and 
majesty,  and  which  the  tumult  of  these  debates  does  not  for  a 
moment  impede  or  disturb,  those  great  social  forces  are  against 
you ;  they  work  with  us,  they  are  marshalled  in  our  support.  And 
the  banner  which  we  now  carry  in  the  fight,  though  perhaps  at 
some  moment  of  the  struggle  it  may  droop  over  our  sinking  heads, 
yet  will  float  again  in  the  eye  of  heaven,  and  will  be  borne  by  the 
firm  hands  of  the  united  people  of  the  three  kingdoms,  perhaps  not 
to  an  easy,  but  to  a  certain  and  to  a  not  distant,  victory." 

To  the  sound  of  this  magnificent  peroration  the  House  divided. 
Never  had  it  been  more  excited.  Never  had  it  been  so  crowded. 
Six  hundred  and  thirty-one  members  being  present,  the  govern- 
ment were  saved  from  defeat  by  five  votes  alone.  No  wonder  the 
Conservatives  cheered  themselves  hoarse.  No  wonder  Mr.  Lowe 
and  other  denizens  of  the  cave  stood  up  and  waved  their  hats  in 
triumph  over  the  heads  of  the  colleagues  they  had  deserted.  For 
although,  after  the  rejection  of  the  amendment,  the  bill  was  allowed 
to  be  read  a  second  time  in  silence,  it  had  received  a  mortal  blow, 
and  the  official  lives  of  the  ministers  who  introduced  it  were  not 
worth  a  quarter's  salary. 

§  5.   Renewal  of  the  Conflict  under  Lord  Derby  and  Mr.  Disraeli 

[The  practical  defeat  of  the  Russell  ministry  led  to  its  resignation, 
and  though  in  a  minority  the  Conservatives  were  called  to  power 
under  the  leadership  of  Lord  Derby.  Mr.  Disraeli,  as  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer,  and  leader  in  the  House  of  Commons,  was  not 
long  in  discovering  that  reform  was  inevitable.  He  was  doubly 
convinced  of  this  by  some  mild  rioting  which  occurred  in  Hyde 
Park  and  by  the  extensive  agitations  of  the  Radicals  throughout 
the  country.] 

The  Conservative  leader,  or  rather  the  leader  of  the  Conserva- 
tives, in  the  House  of  Commons,  was  a  man  of  dauntless  courage 
and  unlimited  resource.  In  language  slightly  reminiscent  of  Mrs. 
Micawber,  he  declared  that  he  would  not  desert  Lord  Derby,  and 
that  he  would  introduce  the  original  bill  on  the  i8th  of  March. 
Three  days  before  that  date  Lord  Derby  held  a  meeting  of  his 
party,  and  announced  that  the  bill  would  provide  for  household 
suffrage  in  boroughs,  subject  to  the  essential  conditions  of  two 
years'  residence  and  the  personal  payment  of  rates.  There  would 


The  Triumph  of  Urban   Democracy          573 

also  be  educational,  professional,  and  property  franchises  with  the 
dual  vote.  The  county  franchise  would  be  reduced  from  a  rental 
qualification  of  fifty  pounds  to  a  rating  qualification  of  fifteen.  If 
this  bill  were  rejected,  the  government  would  dissolve.  These 
last  words  were  the  most  effective  in  Lord  Derby's  speech,  and  it 
is  not  difficult  to  guess  who  prompted  them.  A  penal  dissolution 
has  always  been  regarded  as  a  legitimate  weapon  for  a  minister  in 
an  emergency  to  use.  But  it  means,  of  course,  that  every  member 
who  votes  against  the  government  will  subject  himself,  if  he  suc- 
ceeds, to  a  fine  of  some  hundred  pounds.  The  immediate  effect 
of  the  speech  was  almost  everything  that  the  Prime  Minister  could 
desire. 

Mr.  Henley  who  had  resigned  rather  than  assent  to  the  Reform 
Bill  of  1859,  and  was  not  a  member  of  the  present  government, 
signified  his  hearty  approval  of  household  suffrage  with  payment 
of  rates,  and  the  only  voice  of  disapproval  at  the  meeting  came  from 
Sir  William  Heathcote,  a  model  squire  and  churchman,  but  not  an 
influential  politician.  When  the  bill  was  introduced  it  was  found 
to  correspond  closely  enough  with  Lorb  Derby's  sketch.  The 
fancy  franchises,  however,  lent  themselves  to  ridicule.  The  pay- 
ment of  one  pound  a  year  in  direct  taxes  (not  being  licenses,  so  as  to 
exclude  Mr.  Bright's  "rat-catcher  with  two  dogs")  was  to  give  a 
vote,  and  to  a  householder,  two.  Fifty  pounds  in  the  funds  or  in 
a  savings  bank,  and  membership  of  the  learned  professions,  would 
also  confer  the  right  of  voting.  It  is  strange  and  almost  incredible, 
but  there  seems,  no  doubt,  that  Mr.  Gladstone  contemplated  a 
course  so  unwise  as  opposition  to  the  whole  bill.  But  a  meeting 
of  the  party  at  his  own  house  convinced  him  that  this  could  not  be 
done,  and  he  contented  himself  with  an  exhaustive  criticism  of  its 
principal  provisions.  .  .  .  He  gave  notice  of  a  whole  series  of 
amendments,  and  on  the  nth  of  April  he  moved  the  first  which 
would  have  enfranchised  every  householder,  whether  himself  or 
his  landlord  were  personally  rated  to  the  relief  of  the  poor.  In 
other  words,  the  compound  householder  was  to  have  a  vote.  But 
Mr.  Gladstone  fatally  weakened  his  position  with  his  Radical 
followers  by  proposing  in  a  subsequent  amendment  to  exclude 
all  householders  whose  premises  were  rated  below  five  pounds. 
This  point,  however,  was  not  raised. 

§  6.    The  Debate  on  an  Amendment 

The  debate  on  the  first  amendment  lasted  for  two  nights  and  was 
most  animated  in  tone.  Mr.  Gathorne  Hardy  defended  the  bill 


574  English  Historians 

with  the  impetuous  eagerness  which  distinguished  him,  and  Mr. 
Beresford  Hope,  a  disaffected  follower  of  the  government,  an- 
nounced, with  the  awkward  facetiousness  which  mistakes  itself 
for  humor,  that  he  should  vote  against  the  "Asian  mystery."  Mr. 
Disraeli's  retort  was  one  of  the  happiest  to  be  found  in  Hansard. 
"I  can  assure  the  honorable  gentleman,"  he  said,  "that  I  listened 
with  great  pleasure  to  the  invectives  he  delivered  against  me.  I 
admire  his  style;  it  is  a  very  great  ornament  to  discussion,  but  it 
requires  practice.  I  listen  with  the  greatest  satisfaction  to  all  his 
exhibitions  in  this  House,  and  when  he  talks  about  an  Asian  mystery 
I  will  tell  him  that  there  are  Batavian  graces  in  all  that  he  says 
which  I  notice  with  satisfaction,  and  which  charm  me."  The 
division  showed  a  majority  of  twenty-one  for  the  government, 
and  the  House  adjourned  for  the  Easter  recess. 

Mr.  Disraeli's  triumph  was  signal,  not  the  less  so  because  of  the 
discomfiture  inflicted  on  his  great  adversary.  The  blow  to  Mr. 
Gladstone's  authority  was  serious,  and  nobody  perceived  the  fact 
more  clearly  than  Mr.  Gladstone  himself.  He  contemplated 
resigning  the  lead  of  the  party, and,  in  reply  to  his  faithful  supporter, 
Mr.  Crawford,  announced  that  he  should  move  no  more  amend- 
ments to  the  bill.  It  seems  to  have  been  at  this  time,  if  at  all,  that 
Mr.  Disraeli  said  he  would  "hold  Gladstone  down  for  twenty 
years."  Twenty  minutes  would  have  been  nearer  the  mark;  for 
now  the  tide  began  to  turn.  During  the  Easter  holidays  the  coun- 
try had  the  opportunity  of  hearing  what  the  idol  of  advanced 
Reformers  thought  of  Mr.  Gladstone.  "Who  is  there  in  the 
House  of  Commons,"  asked  Mr.  Bright  at  Birmingham,  "who 
equals  him  in  knowledge  of  all  political  questions?  Who  equals 
him  in  earnestness?  Who  equals  him  in  eloquence?  Who  equals 
him  in  courage,  and  fidelity  to  his  convictions?  If  these  gentlemen 
who  say  they  will  not  follow  him  have  any  one  who  is  equal,  let 
them  show  him.  If  they  can  point  out  any  statesman  who  can  add 
dignity  and  grandeur  to  the  stature  of  Mr.  Gladstone,  let  them 
produce  him."  At  this  meeting,  and  at  many  others  held  in  the 
Easter  recess,  the  removal  of  all  restrictions  upon  household  suf- 
frage, and  a  franchise  for  lodgers,  were  demanded. 

The  Reformers  had  not  long  to  wait.  Consideration  of  the  bill 
in  committee  was  resumed  on  the  2nd  of  May,  and  Mr.  Ayrton's 
amendment  reducing  the  period  of  qualification  from  two  years  to 
one  was  carried  against  the  government  by  eighty-one  votes. 
The  government  yielded  without  discredit  to  the  decision  of  the 
committee.  But  another  instance  of  submission  was  not  equally 


The  Triumph  of  Urban   Democracy          575 

fortunate.  The  Reform  League  having  summoned  a  meeting  in 
Hyde  Park  for  the  6th  of  May,  Mr.  Walpole  issued  a  notice 
signed  with  his  own  name  to  warn  all  persons  against  attending  it. 
Tne  League  replied  by  urging  all  persons  to  attend  it,  and  Lcrd 
Derby  announced  that  as  it  was  perfectly  legal  nothing  would  be 
done  to  prevent  it.  It  was  accordingly  held  in  great  numbers  and 
perfect  order.  Although  there  were  at  least  two  hundred  thcusam' 
people  in  the  park,  not  a  plant  ^as  aisturbed,  nor  the  leaf  cf  a 
flower  touched.  Colonel  Dickson  rather  happily  addressed  the 
crowd  as  "My  friends  and  fellow-trespassers."  But  satisfactory 
as  the  result  was  from  Colonel  Dickson's  pcint'cf  view,  the  position 
of  Mr.  Walpole,  a  man  too  good  for  this  ucrld,  had  beccrr.e  in- 
tolerable. He  resigned  the  Home  Office,  and  was  succeeded  by 
Mr.  Gathorne  Hardy.  Events  outside  strengthened  the  Liberal 
party  in  the  House  of  Commons,  and  Mr.  Gladstone,  receiving  a 
deputation  to  express  confidence  in  him  as  a  leader,  denounced 
the  "absurd,  preposterous,  and  mischievous  distinctions  of  per- 
sonal rating."  Mr.  Disraeli  was,  or  professed  to  be,  much  shocked 
by  this  language.  But  he  soon  had  more  important  matters  to 
occupy  his  mind.  Liberals  were  coming  together  again,  and  were 
showing  a  disposition  to  follow  the  advice  of  a  sturdy  democrat, 
who  remarked  that  as  Disraeli  was  bent  on  manipulating  democ- 
racy, they  should  take  his  democracy,  and  treat  his  manipula- 
tion as  the  wicked  would  be  treated  at  the  Day  of  Judgment. 

§  7.   A  Radical  Amendment 

Mr.  McCullagh  Torrens,  the  biographer  of  Sir  James  Graham 
and  Lord  Melbourne,  proposed  the  enfranchisement  of  lodgers 
and  to  this  the  government  agreed,  only  stipulating  that  the  lodg- 
ings must  be  worth,  unfurnished,  ten  pounds  a  year,  or  about 
four  shillings  a  week.  A  still  more  important  change  followed. 
Mr.  Hodgkinson,  Liberal  member  for  Newark,  a  local  sclioitcr 
little  known  in  the  House,  moved  "that  no  person  other  than  the 
occupier  shall  be  assessed  to  parochial  rates  within  the  limits  of  a 
Parliamentary  borough.".  .  .  So  little  did  Mr.  Hodgkinson  dream 
of  success  that  he  estimated  the  probable  majority  against  him  at 
about  a  hundred.  To  the  surprise  of  every  one,  and  the  consterna- 
tion of  his  own  followers,  Mr.  Disraeli  at  once  accepted  the  amend- 
ment, which  was  added,  without  a  division  to  the  bill.  Mr. 
Gladstone  has  left  it  on  record  that  no  episode  in  the  romantic 
career  of  the  "mystery  man"  astonished  him  more  than  this, 


576  English  Historians 

adding  that  Mr.  Disraeli  made  up  his  mind  before  he  had  con- 
sulted the  Cabinet,  who  were  afterwards  summoned  to  hear  from 
an  eminent  statistician,  Mr.  Lambert,  the  numerical  effect  of  the 
change.  Thus,  of  Lord  Derby's  two  main  safeguards,  a  two 
years'  residence  and  personal  rating,  one  had  already  gone,  and  the 
other  had  become  a  farce ;  for  although  every  borough  voter  would 
be  personally  rated,  so  would  every  resident  in  a  borough,  which 
was  household  suffrage,  pure  and  simple,  without  restriction  or 
modification.  The  compound  householder  ceased,  from  a  Par- 
liamentary point  of  view,  to  exist,  and  a  silence,  only  to  be  broken 
by  the  historian,  fell  upon  the  burning  question  of  lobby  gossip 
and  dinner-table  talk.  Well  might  Bernal  Osborne  declare  that 
the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  was  the  greatest  Radical  in  the 
House.  The  fury  of  Mr.  Lowe  almost  exceeded  his  very  con- 
siderable powers  of  speech.  He  implored  the  gentlemen  of  Eng- 
land, "with  their  ancestry  behind  them,  and  their  posterity  before 
them,"  —  a  natural  position  which  they  shared  even  with  compound 
householders,  —  to  "save  the  Constitution  from  the  hands  of  a  mul- 
titude struggling  with  want  and  discontent." 

What  was  to  become  of  the  House  of  Lords  ?  The  country  and 
the  Conservative  party  were  alike  ruined.  Sir  Rainald  Knightley, 
who  had  helped  to  destroy  the  far  milder  Reform  Bill  of  the  previous 
year,  complained  bitterly  of  desertion.  But  Mr.  Disraeli  remained 
passive  and  imperturbable,  satisfied  that,  in  Lord  Derby's  phrase, 
he  had  "dished  the  Whigs"  with  a  vengeance.  Then  the  pace 
became  fast  and  furious.  Mr.  Mill's  proposal  for  woman's 
franchise  was  dismissed  with  the  dreary  jocularity  considered 
suitable  to  such  occasions.  Mill's  speech  in  moving  his  amend- 
ment is  the  ablest  and  clearest  statement  of  the  case  for  the  political 
enfranchisement  of  women.  Much  of  it  was  too  high-flown  and 
romantic  for  the  House  of  Commons.  But  the  purely  Parlia- 
mentary arguments  are  very  strong.  All  other  barriers  to  the  suf- 
frage, said  Mill,  could  be  surmounted  by  obtaining  the  requisite 
qualification.  This  alone  could  not.  An  unrepresented  woman 
might  pay  twice  as  much  in  taxation  as  a  represented  man.  If 
politics  were  "not  a  woman's  business,"  neither  were  they  a  man's, 
unless  he  happened  to  be  a  member  of  Parliament.  If  "indirect 
influence"  were  equivalent  to  representation,  rich  men  ought  to 
be  disfranchised  on  account  of  their  wealth.  Power  without 
responsibility  was  the  most  mischievous  kind  of  power.  The 
closing  of  professions  to  women,  and  the  absolute  right  of  husbands 
to  take  their  wives'  property  unless  it  was  protected  by  settlement, 


The  Triumph  of  Urban   Democracy          577 

were  grievances  which  would  not  be  redressed  until  women  had 
votes. 

Prophecy  is  always  dangerous,  and  this  one  has  not  been  more 
fortunate  than  others.  But  that  such  arguments  should  not  have 
been  deemed  worthy  of  a  serious  reply  is  discreditable  to  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  especially  to  its  leaders.  Neither  of 
them  took  part  in  the  debate.  Gladstone  voted  against  the  amend- 
ment. Disraeli  did  not  vote  at  all.  The  copyhold  franchise  fixed 
by  the  government  at  ten  pounds  was  next  reduced  to  five,  and  the 
occupation  franchise  in  counties  was  brought  down  from  fifteen 
pounds  to  twelve.  The  educational  franchise  was  abandoned, 
despite  the  protest  of  Mr.  Fawcett,  who  clung  to  the  belief  that 
education  would  make  every  one  a  Liberal.  The  property 
franchise  followed,  and  the  dual  vote,  which  Mr.  Gladstone  had 
always  opposed,  died  without  an  epitaph  or  a  tear.  The  same  fate 
befell  Mr.  Mill's  scheme,  or  rather  Mr.  Hare's,  of  enabling  electors 
to  vote  for  "members  of  Parliament  in  general"  if  they  disliked 
their  own  candidates,  which  almost  justified  Mr.  Bright's  ob- 
jurgatory remark  about  great  thinkers,  "The  worst  of  them  is 
that  they  so  often  think  wrong."  On  this  .occasion  also  Mill 
addressed  the  committee  with  great  ability,  and  Lord  Cranborne 
administered  a  dignified  rebuke  to  his  fellow-members  for  the  in- 
difference with  which  they  had  received  such  a  speech  from  such 
a  man.  Outside  the  sphere  of  religion  there  were  not  many  things 
which  Lord  Cranborne  respected.  But  intellectual  eminence  was 
one  of  them. 

§  8.   Redistribution  0}  Seats 

The  disfranchisement  of  three  boroughs  for  bribery  led  to  the 
subject  of  redistribution  and  to  another  defeat  of  the  government. 
The  bill  would  have  left  Cockermouth  with  a  population  of  seven 
thousand,  to  return  the  same  number  of  members  as  Liverpool, 
with  a  population  of  nearly  half  a  million.  As  a  small  step  towards 
electoral  justice,  Mr.  Laing  carried  an  amendment  to  deprive  of 
one  member  all  boroughs  with  a  population  of  less  than  ten  thou- 
sand. Mr.  Laing's  victory  led,  after  the  Whitsuntide  recess,  to  a 
considerable  change  in  the  redistributing  clauses  of  the  bill. 
Even  in  their  new  form  they  were  absurdly  inadequate.  But 
still  they  were  an  appreciable  though  a  very  short  step  toward  a 
system  of  numerical  representation.  London  received  four  new 
members  for  the  two  new  boroughs  of  Hackney  and  Chelsea. 
After  several  debates  at  a  later  stage,  in  the  course  of  which  Gen- 


578  English   Historians 

eral  Peel  observed  that  nothing  had  so  little  vitality  as  a  vital  point, 
that  nothing  was  so  insecure  as  a  security,  and  that  nothing  was 
so  elastic  as  the  conscience  of  a  Cabinet  minister,  a  third  member 
was  given  to  Birmingham,  Manchester,  Liverpool,  and  Leeds. 
Salford  and  Merthyr  received  a  second.  The  new  boroughs  created, 
nine  in  number,  were  Hartlepool,  Darlington,  Middlesbrough, 
Burnley,  Dewsbury,  Stalybridge,  Wednesbury,  Gravesend,  and 
Stockton.  The  University  of  London  was  made  for  the  first  time 
a  constituency,  with  a  single  representative.  Twenty-five  seats 
were  bestowed  on  the  counties;  South  Lancashire,  for  which  Mr. 
Gladstone  sat,  being  further  divided  into  Southeast  and  Southwest. 
The  new  seats  were  obtained,  not  by  increasing  the  numbers  of 
the  House,  but  by  the  partial  disfranchisement  of  small,  doubly 
represented  towns.  The  use  of  voting-papers,  the  last  remaining 
barrier  against  a  turbulent  populace  and  the  luxury  of  the  elderly, 
the  indolent,  the  distant,  the  infirm,  was  expunged  from  the  bill 
on  the  2oth  of  June  by  a  majority  of  thirty-eight,  and  thus  the  Lib- 
eral party  were  victorious  all  along  the  line. 

Everything  for  which  Mr.  Gladstone  asked  had  been  extorted 
or  conceded.  The  lodger  had  been  enfranchised  in  the  precise 
form  recommended  by  Mr.  Bright  seventeen  years  before;  the 
compound  householder  was  no  more;  the  property  franchise  had 
followed  the  dual  vote  into  oblivion;  voting-papers  had  gone  after 
them;  the  educational  suffrage  had  been  rejected  with  scorn.  No 
wonder  that  on  the  third  reading  the  honest  opponents  of  reform, 
few  as  they  were,  spoke  their  minds  without  reserve.  Lord  Cran- 
borne,  who  had  already  described  the  monarchical  principle  as 
dead,  the  aristocratic  principle  as  doomed,  and  the  democratic 
principle  as  triumphant,  now  denounced  "a  political  betrayal 
which  had  no  parallel  in  our  annals,  and  which  had  struck  at  the 
roots  of  that  Parliamentary  confidence  upon  which  alone  the 
strength  of  our  representative  system  was  maintained."  Mr. 
Lowe  declared  that  England  had  "gained  a  shameful  victory  over 
herself,"  and  referred  to  "the  shame,  the  rage,  the  scorn,  the  in- 
dignation, and  the  despair  with  which  the  measure  was  viewed  by 
every  Englishman  who  was  not  a  slave  to  the  trammels  of  party  or 
dazzled  by  the  glare  of  a  temporary  and  ignoble  success."  Mr. 
Lowe's  practical  moral  that  we  must  compel  our  future  masters 
to  learn  their  letters  was  very  much  to  the  point,  and  a  good  deal 
more  valuable  than  his  highly  artificial  invective. 

Mr.  Bright's  patronizing  approval  must  have  been  less  to  Mr. 
Disraeli's  taste  than  the  attacks  of  Lord  Cranborne  and  Mr.  Lowe. 


The  Triumph  of  Urban  Democracy          579 

But  in  truth  he  cared  very  little  for  either  the  one  or  the  other. 
For  him  the  supreme  test  of  human  affairs  was  success,  and  if  he 
succeeded  he  attributed  hostile  criticism  to  the  pique  engendered 
by  failure.  It  was  not  his  bill,  but  it  had  passed,  and  he,  not  his 
adversaries,  sat  upon  the  Treasury  Bench.  "Sing,  riding's  a  joy! 
For  me,  I  ride."  They  had  their  rhapsodies  of  conscious  virtue. 
He  led  the  House  of  Commons.  Nor  can  the  severest  judge  of  his 
singular  and  cryptic  character  deny  that  there  is  something  more 
wholesome  than  Mr.  Lowe's  splenetic  outburst  in  the  spirited  sen- 
tences with  which  Mr.  Disraeli  concluded  his  aggressive  apology, 
"I  think  England  is  safe  in  the  race  of  men  who  inhabit  her;  that 
she  is  safe  in  something  much  more  precious  than  her  accumulated 
capital,  her  accumulated  experience;  she  is  safe  in  her  national 
character,  in  her  fame,  in  the  tradition  of  a  thousand  years,  and  in 
that  glorious  future  which  I  believe  awaits  her." 

§  9.    The  Bill  in  the  House  of  Lords 

Next  day  the  bill  was  brought  to  the  bar  of  the  House  of  Lords, 
and  the  second  reading  was  fixed  for  the  22nd  of  July.  Those 
who  study  the  British  Constitution  in  books  of  authority  learn  that 
Parliament  consists,  besides  the  sovereign,  of  two  houses,  one  he- 
reditary and  the  other  elective.  The  elective  House,  dependent 
upon  the  constituencies,  is  penetrated  with  the  spirit  of  party, 
amenable  to  whips  and  wirepullers,  swayed  from  one  side  to 
another  by  the  breath  of  the  popular  will.  The  hereditary  House, 
on  the  other  hand,  is  entirely  removed  from  the  influence  of 
political  connection,  and  judges  public  issues  entirely  on  their 
merits.  Having  no  electors  to  please,  and  being  placed  above 
vulgar  inducements  by  the  fortunate  accident  of  birth,  the  peers 
can  afford  to  sink  every  consideration  except  that  of  regard  for 
their  country's  welfare,  of  which  the  responsibilities  involved  in 
their  lofty  eminence  forbid  them  to  lose  sight.  Not  being  told 
(for  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  theory  of  the  Constitution)  that 
the  Lords,  like  the  Commons,  are  divided  into  parties,  with  their 
respective  leaders  and  whips,  the  studejit  would  conclude  that 
this  illustrious  assembly  paid  no  heed  to  the  frivolous  question 
whether  a  bill  had  been  introduced  by  a  Liberal  or  a  Conservative 
ministry.  What,  then,  according  to  the  doctors  of  the  law,  would 
have  been  the  duty  of  the  Upper  House  in  July,  1867  ? 

A  bill  was  laid  before  them  at  the  close  of  the  session  involving 
large  and  hazardous  alterations  of  the  political  system  which  had 


580  English  Historians 

been  in  vogue  for  five-and- thirty  years.  It  had  never  been  sub- 
mitted to  the  judgment  of  the  country,  unless  the  country  was 
represented  by  the  Reform  League.  It  had  been  turned  upside  down 
in  committee,  and  was  much  wider  in  its  scope  than  a  bill  which 
the  same  House  of  Commons  had  refused  to  pass  the  year  before. 
That  bill  would  at  the  most  have  added  half  a  million  electors  to 
the  constituent  bodies.  This  bill  would  add  at  least  a  million, 
most  of  them  uneducated,  and  some  of  them  the  poorest  of  the  poor. 
There  could  hardly  be  a  stronger  case  for  the  suspensory  action 
supposed  to  be  exercised  by  a  Chamber  of  Review.  This  very 
session  the  Lords  rejected  bills  for  the  abolition  of  church  rates, 
and  for  the  removal  of  religious  tests  in  the  universities,  which 
had  been  repeatedly  passed  by  the  Commons.  What  happened  ? 
The  leader  of  a  great  party,  the  prime  minister  of  England,  sum- 
moned what  in  America  was  called  a  caucus.  Before  the  debate 
on  the  second  reading  he  assembled  at  his  own  house  a  hundred 
Conservative  peers,  and  told  them  that  he  wished  the  bill  to  pass 
with  the  fewest  possible  amendments  in  the  shortest  possible  time. 
He  intimated,  nor  obscurely,  that  if  it  failed  to  pass,  he  should 
resign.  He  had  threatened  in  the  event  of  its  rejection  by  the 
Commons  to  dissolve.  But  a  dissolution  has  no  terrors  for  the 
peers,  whereas  they  dreaded  a  Liberal,  perhaps  a  Radical,  gov- 
ernment as  the  worst  of  calamities. 

Accordingly,  after  two  nights'  debate,  the  bill  was  read  a  second 
time  without  a  division.  The  speeches  were  not  remarkable,  but 
Lord  Derby  heard  a  good  deal  of  plain  speaking  from  Lord  Car- 
narvon, who  proclaimed  and  lamented,  in  language  borrowed 
from  Disraeli's  attack  upon  Peel,  that  conservatism  was  an  or- 
ganized hypocrisy.  The  prime  minister,  with  his  accustomed 
frankness,  explained  that  he  did  not  intend  for  a  third  time  to  be 
made  a  mere  stop-gap  until  it  should  suit  the  convenience  of  the 
Liberal  party  to  forget  their  dissensions,  and  bring  forward  a 
measure  which  should  oust  him  from  office  and  place  them  there. 
Lord  Shaftesbury  delivered  the  ablest  attack  upon  the  bill,  and 
Lord  Cairns  the  ablest  defence  of  it.  But  a  discussion  which  is 
not  to  be  followed  by  a  trial  of  strength  in  the  lobbies  has  seldom 
much  life  in  it,  and  this  was  no  exception  to  the  rule.  Some  im- 
portant changes  were  made  in  the  committee.  But  as  only  one 
of  them  was  accepted  by  the  House  of  Commons  and  became  law, 
it  is  needless  to  recapitulate  the  others.  Lord  Cairns,  taking  up  a 
suggestion  made  by  Lord  Russell,  proposed  that  in  constituencies 
returning  three  members  no  one  should  vote  for  more  than  two 


The  Triumph  of  Urban   Democracy          581 

candidates,  nor  in  the  city  of  London,  which  returned  four  mem- 
bers, for  more  than  three.  This  idea  of  representing  minorities 
was  less  objectionable  than  the  cumulative  vote  which  Mr.  Lowe 
had  vainly  proposed  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Although  Bright, 
Gladstone,  and  Disraeli  united  in  disapproving  of  it,  it  was  accepted 
for  the  sake  of  agreement  between  the  houses,  and  became  law, 
perhaps  the  single  instance  of  a  political  innovation  made  by  a 
judge. 

Lord  Derby's  final  speech  on  the  motion  that  "this  bill  do  pass" 
contained  his  frank  and  famous  acknowledgment  that  he  was 
"taking  a  leap  in  the  dark."  His  next  words,  however,  were  an 
expression  of  confidence  in  the  sound  sense  of  his  fellow-country- 
men, and  ignorance  of  the  future  is  not  the  charge  against  the 
government  of  1867.  The  act  was,  on  the  whole,  useful  and  bene- 
ficial. The  county  franchise  was  indeed  merely  tinkered,  and  the 
scheme  of  redistribution  little  better  than  a  sham.  But  the  bor- 
ough franchise,  both  for  householders  and  for  lodgers,  was  placed 
upon  a  firm  and  solid  foundation  which  has  stood  the  test  of  time. 
If  the  characters  of  public  men  were  of  no  public  importance,  this 
would  be  a  conclusive  defence  for  Lord  Derby  and  Mr.  Disraeli. 
But  it  was  impossible  for  them  to  deny  either  that  in  1866  they 
opposed  and  destroyed  a  Reform  Bill  much  more  Conservative 
than  their  own,  or  that  in  1867  they  abandoned  safeguard  after 
safeguard  which  they  had  pronounced  essential  to  the  welfare 
of  the  State. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Walpole,  The  History  of  Twenty-five  Years,  Vol.  II.  Morley,  Life  of 
Gladstone,  Vol.  II,  Book  V,  chaps,  xiii  and  xiv.  Barnett  Smith,  Life  and 
Letters  of  John  Bright.  Lives  of  Disraeli,  Earl  of  Bcaconsfield,  by  Gorst, 
Froude,  Sichel,  and  O'Connor.  Dickinson,  The  Development  of  Parliament 
during  the  Nineteenth  Century. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  ENFRANCHISEMENT  OF  THE  RURAL  LABORER 

THE  general  election  of  1880  gave  the  Liberals  a  large  majority 
over  both  Conservatives  and  Home  Rulers.  In  the  Cabinet  or- 
ganized by  Mr.  Gladstone  there  were  three  distinguished  Radicals, 
Mr.  Bright,  Mr.  Chamberlain,  and  Sir  Charles  Dilke;  but  three 
years  passed  before  an  attempt  was  made  to  force  a  further  exten- 
sion of  the  franchise.  After  several  disturbing  events  such  as  the 
troubles  in  Ireland,  Egypt,  and  South  Africa,  the  strength  of  the 
government's  support  throughout  the  country  was  sensibly  dimin- 
ished. Partly  from  principle  and  partly  from  a  political  design  to 
complete  the  ruin  of  the  Conservatives,  the  ministry  decided  to 
enfranchise  the  agricultural  laborers  and  thus  retain  the  confidence 
of  all  Radicals  and  get  the  support  of  the  new  voters.  In  his  work 
on  Mr.  Gladstone,  Mr.  Morley  gives  a  full  account  of  the  last  of  the 
great  political  reforms. 

§  i.  Parliamentary  Representation  after  1867 — the  New  Measure1 

The  question  of  extending  to  householders  in  the  country  the 
franchise  that  in  1867  had  been  conferred  on  householders  in 
boroughs,  had  been  first  pressed  with  eloquence  and  resolution  by 
Mr.  Trevelyan.  In  1876  he  introduced  two  resolutions,  one  for 
extended  franchise,  the  other  for  a  new  arrangement  of  seats, 
made  necessary  by  the  creation  of  the  new  voters.  In  a  Tory 
Parliament  he  had,  of  course,  no  chance.  Mr.  Gladstone,  not 
naturally  any  more  ardent  for  change  in  political  machinery  than 
Burke  or  Canning  had  been,  was  in  no  hurry  about  it,  but  was  well 
aware  that  the  triumphant  Parliament  of  1880  could  not  be  al- 
lowed to  expire  without  the  effective  adoption  by  the  government 

1  Morley,  Life  o)  Gladstone,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  124  ff.  By  permission  of  The 
Marmillan  Company,  Publishers. 

582 


The  Enfranchisement  of  the  Rural  Laborer      583 

of  proposals  in  principle  such  as  those  made  by  Mr.  Trevelyan 
in  1876.  One  wing  of  the  Cabinet  hung  back.  Mr.  Gladstone 
himself,  reading  the  signs  in  the  political  skies,  felt  that  the  hour 
had  struck;  the  Cabinet  followed,  and  the  bill  was  framed.  Never, 
said  Mr.  Gladstone,  was  a  bill  so  large  in  respect  of  the  numbers 
to  have  votes,  so  innocent  in  point  of  principle,  for  it  raised  no  new 
questions  and  sprang  from  no  new  principles.  It  went,  he  con- 
tended, and  most  truly  contended,  to  the  extreme  of  considera- 
tion for  opponents,  and  avoided  several  points  that  had  special 
attractions  for  friends.  So  likewise  the  general  principles  on 
which  redistribution  of  seats  would  be  governed  were  admittedly 
framed  in  a  conservative  spirit. 

The  comparative  magnitude  of  the  operation  was  thus  described 
by  Mr.  Gladstone  (February  28,  1884) :  — 

"In  1832  there  was  passed  what  was  considered  aJVlagna.  Charta 
of  British  liberties;  but  that  Magna  Charta  of  British  liberties 
addetT^  according  to  the  previous  estimate  of  Lord  John  Russell, 
500,000,  while  according  to  the  results  considerably  less  than 
500,000  were  added  to  the  entire  constituency  of  the  three  coun- 
tries. After  1832  we  come  to  1866.  At  that  time  the  total  con- 
stituency of  the  United  Kingdom  reached  1,364,000.  By  the  bills 
which  were  passed  between  1867  and  1869  that  number  was  raised 
to  2,448,000.  Under  the  action  of  the  present  law  the  constitu- 
ency has  reached  in  round  numbers  what  i  would  call  3,000,000. 
This  bill,  if  it  passes  as  presented,  will  add  to  the  English 
constituency  over  1,300,000  persons.  It  will  add  to  the  Scotch 
constitx \ency,  Scotland  being  at  present  rather  better  provided  in 
this  respect  than  either  of  the  other  countries,  over  200,000,  and 
to  the  Irish  constituency  over  400,000;  or  in  the  main,  to  the 
present  aggregate  constituency  of  the  United  Kingdom  taken  at 
3,000,000,  it  will  add  2,000,000  more,  nearly  twice  as  much  as  was 
added  since  1867,  and  more  than  four  times  as  much  as  was  added 
in  1832." 

The  bill  was  read  a  second  time  (April  7)  by  the  overwhelming 
majority  of  340  against  210.  Even  those  who  most  disliked  the 
measure  admitted  that  a  majority  of  this  size  could  not  be  made 
light  of,  though  they  went  on  in  charity  to  say  that  it  did  not  rep- 
resent the  honest  opinion  of  those  who  composed  it.  It  was,  in 
fact,  as  such  persons  argued,  the  strongest  proof  of  the  degradation 
brought  into  our  politics  by  the  act  of  1867.  "All  the  bribes  of 
Danby  or  of  Walpole  or  of  Pelham,"  cried  one  excited  critic,  "all 
the  bullying  of  the  Tudors,  all  the  lobbying  of  George  III, 


584  English  Historians 

would  have  been  powerless  to  secure  it  in  the  most  corrupt  or  the 
most  servile  days  of  the  ancient  House  of  Commons." 

§  2.   Stoppage  in  the  House  o)  Lords 

On  the  third  reading  the  opposition  disappeared  from  the  House, 
and  on  Mr.  Gladstone's  prompt  initiative  it  was  placed  on  record 
in  the  journals  that  the  bill  had  been  carried  by  a  unanimous  ver- 
dict. It  went  to  the  Lords,  and  by  a  majority  first  of  fifty-nine 
and  then  of  fifty  they  put  what  Mr.  Gladstone  mildly  called  "an 
effectual  stoppage  on  the  bill,  or  in  other  words  they  did  practically 
reject  it."  The  plain  issue,  if  we  may  call  it  plain,  was  this.  What 
the  Tories,  with  different  degrees  of  sincerity,  professed  to  dread  was 
that  the  election  might  take  place  on  the  new  franchise,  but  with  an 
unaltered  disposition  of  Parliamentary  seats.  At  heart  the  bulk 
of  them  were  as  little  friendly  to  a  lowered  franchise  in  the  coun- 
ties as  they  had  been  in  the  case  of  the  towns  before  Mr.  Disraeli 
educated  them.  But  this  was  a  secret  dangerous  to  let  out,  for  the 
enfranchised  workers  in  the  towns  would  never  understand  why 
workers  in  the  villages  should  not  have  a  vote. 

Apart  from  this  the  Tory  leaders  believed  that  unless  the  allot- 
ment of  seats  went  with  the  addition  of  a  couple  of  million  new 
voters,  the  prospect  would  be  ruinously  unfavorable  to  their  party, 
and  they  offered  determined  resistance  to  the  chance  of  a  jockey- 
ing operation  of  this  kind.  At  least  one  very  eminent  man  among 
them  had  privately  made  up  his  mind  that  the  proceeding  supposed 
to  be  designed  by  their  opponents  —  their  distinct  professions 
notwithstanding  —  would  efface  the  Tory  party  for  thirty  years 
to  come.  Mr.  Gladstone  and  his  government  on  the  other  hand 
agreed,  on  grounds  of  their  own  and  for  reasons  of  their  own,  that 
the  two  changes  should  come  into  operation  together.  What  they 
contended  was,  that  to  tack  redistribution  on  to  franchise  was  to 
scotch  or  kill  franchise.  "I  do  not  hesitate  to  say,"  Mr.  Glad- 
stone told  his  electors,  "that  those  who  are  opposing  us,  and 
making  use  of  this  topic  of  redistribution  of  seats  as  a  means  for 
defeating  the  Franchise  Bill,  know  as  well  as  we  do  that,  had  we 
been  such  idiots  and  such  dolts  as  to  present  to  Parliament  a  bill 
for  the  combined  purpose,  or  to  bring  in  two  bills  for  the  two  pur- 
poses as  one  measure  —  I  say,  they  know  as  well  as  we  do,  that  a 
disgraceful  failure  would  have  been  the  result  of  our  folly,  and  that 
we  should  have  been  traitors  to  you,  and  to  the  cause  we  had  in 
hand."  Disinterested  onlookers  thought  there  ought  to  be  no 


The  Enfranchisement  of  the  Rural   Laborer      585 

great  difficulty  in  securing  the  result  that  both  sides  desired.  As 
the  Duke  of  Argyll  put  it  to  Mr.  Gladstone,  if  in  a  private  business 
two  men  were  to  come  to  a  breach,  when  standing  so  near  to  one 
another  in  aim  and  profession,  they  would  be  shut  up  in  bedlam. 
This  is  just  what  the  judicious  reader  will  think  to-day. 

§  3.   Double  Agitation  throughout  the  Country 

The  controversy  was  transported  from  Parliament  to  the  plat- 
form, and  a  vigorous  agitation  marked  the  autumn  recess.  It  was 
a  double  agitation.  What  began  as  a  campaign  on  behalf  of  the 
rural  householder,  threatened  to  end  as  one  against  hereditary 
legislators.  It  is  a  well-known  advantage  in  movements  of  this 
sort  to  be  not  only  for,  but  also  against,  somebody  or  something; 
against  a  minister,  by  preference,  or  if  not  an  individual,  then 
against  a  body.  A  hereditary  legislature  in  a  community  that 
has  reached  the  self-governing  stage  is  an  anachronism  that  makes 
the  easiest  of  all  marks  for  mockery  and  attack,  so  long  as  it  lasts. 
Nobody  can  doubt  that  if  Mr.  Gladstone  had  been  the  frantic 
demagogue  or  fretful  revolutionist  that  his  opponents  thought, 
he  now  had  an  excellent  chance  of  bringing  the  question  of  the 
House  of  Lords  irresistibly  to  the  front.  As  it  was,  in  the  midst 
of  the  storm  raised  by  his  lieutenants  and  supporters  all  over  the 
country,  he  was  the  moderating  force,  elaborately  appealing,  as 
he  said,  to  the  reason  rather  than  the  fears  of  his  opponents.  .  .  . 

In  August,  Mr.  Gladstone  submitted  to  the  Queen  a  memoran- 
dum on  the  political  situation.  It  was  much  more  elaborate  than 
the  ordinary  official  submissions.  Lord  Granville  was  the  only 
colleague  who  had  seen  it,  and  Mr.  Gladstone  was  alone  respon- 
sible for  laying  it  before  the  sovereign.  It  is  a  masterly  state- 
ment of  the  case,  starting  from  the  assumption  for  the  sake  of  argu- 
ment that  the  Tories  were  right  and  the  Liberals  wrong  as  to  the 
two  bills;  then  proceeding  on  the  basis  of  a  strongly  expressed 
desire  to  keep  back  a  movement  for  organic  change;  next  urging 
the  signs  that  such  a  movement  would  go  forward  with  irresistible 
force  if  the  bill  were  again  rejected,  and  concluding  thus:  — 

"I  may  say  in  conclusion  that  there  is  no  personal  act  if  it  be 
compatible  with  personal  honor  and  likely  to  contribute  to  an  end 
which  I  hold  very  dear,  that  I  would  not  gladly  do  for  the  purpose 
of  helping  to  close  the  present  controversy,  and  in  closing  it  to 
prevent  the  growth  of  one  probably  more  complex  and  more  for- 
midable." 


586  English  Historians 

This  document,  tempered,  unrhetorical,  almost  dispassionate, 
was  the  starting-point  of  proceedings  that,  after  enormous  difficul- 
ties had  been  surmounted  by  patience  and  perseverance,  working 
through  his  power  in  Parliament  and  his  authority  in  the  coun- 
try, ended  in  final  pacification  and  a  sound  political  settlement.  It 
was  Mr.  Gladstone's  statesmanship  that  brought  this  pacification 
into  sight  and  within  reach. 

The  Queen  was  deeply  struck  both  by  the  force  of  his  arguments 
and  the  earnest  tone  in  which  they  were  pressed.  Though  doubting 
whether  there  was  any  strong  desire  for  a  change  in  the  position  of 
the  House  of  Lords,  still  she  "did  not  shut  her  eyes  to  the  possible 
gravity  of  the  situation"  (August  31).  She  seemed  inclined  to 
take  some  steps  for  ascertaining  the  opinion  of  the  leaders  of 
Opposition,  with  a  view  to  inducing  them  to  modify  their  programme. 
The  Duke  of  Richmond  visited  Balmoral  (September  13);  but 
when  Mr.  Gladstone,  then  himself  on  Deeside,  heard  what  had 
passed  in  the  direction  of  compromise,  he  could  only  say,  "Waste 
of  breath ! "  To  all  suggestions  of  a  dissolution  on  the  case  in 
issue,  Mr.  Gladstone  said  to  a  confidential  emissary  from  Bal- 
moral :  — 

"Never  will  I  be  a  party  to  dissolving  in  order  to  determine 
whether  the  Lords  or  the  Commons  were  right  upon  the  Franchise 
Bill.  If  I  have  anything  to  do  with  dissolution,  it  will  be  a  disso- 
lution upon  organic  change  in  the  House  of  Lords.  Should  this 
bill  be  again  rejected  in  a  definite  manner,  there  will  be  only  two 
courses  open  to  me:  one  to  cut  out  of  public  life,  which  I  shall 
infinitely  prefer;  the  other  to  become  a  supporter  of  organic  change 
in  the  House  of  Lords,  which  I  hate  and  which  I  am  making  all 
this  fuss  in  order  to  avoid.  We  have  a  few  weeks  before  us  to  try 
and  avert  the  mischief.  After  a  second  rejection  it  will  be  too 
late.  There  is  perhaps  the  alternative  of  advising  a  large  creation 
of  peers;  but  to  this  there  are  great  objections,  even  if  the  Queen 
were  willing.  I  am  not  at  present  sure  that  I  could  bring  myself 
to  be  a  party  to  the  adoption  of  a  plan  like  that  of  1832." 

When  people  talked  to  him  of  dissolution  as  a  means  of  bring- 
ing the  Lords  to  account,  he  replied  in  scorn:  "A  marvellous 
conception  1  On  such  a  dissolution,  if  the  country  disapproved  of 
the  conduct  of  its  representatives,  it  would  cashier  them;  but, 
if  it  disapproved  of  the  conduct  of  the  peers,  it  would  simply  have 
to  see  them  resume  their  place  of  power,  to  employ  it  to  the  best  of 
their  ability  as  opportunity  might  serve,  in  thwarting  the  desires 
of  the  country  expressed  through  its  representatives." 


The   Enfranchisement  of  the   Rural   Laborer      587 

It  was  reported  to  Mr.  Gladstone  that  his  speeches  in  Scotland 
(though  they  were  marked  by  much  restraint)  created  some  dis- 
pleasure at  Balmoral.  He  wrote  to  Lord  Granville  (September 
26):  — 

"The  Queen  does  not  know  the  facts.  If  she  did,  she  would 
have  known  that  while  I  have  been  compelled  to  deviate  from  the 
intention  of  speaking  only  to  constituents  which  (with  much 
difficulty)  I  kept  until  Aberdeen,  I  have  thereby  (and  again  with 
much  difficulty  in  handling  the  audiences,  every  one  of  which 
would  have  wished  a  different  course  of  proceeding)  been  enabled 
to  do  much  in  the  way  of  keeping  the  question  of  organic  change 
in  the  House  of  Lords  out  of  the  present  stage  of  the  contro- 
versy." .  .  . 

§  4.    Mr.  Gladstone  and  the  House  of  Lords 

Meanwhile  Mr.  Gladstone  was  hard  at  work  in  other  directions. 
He  was  urgent  (October  2)  that  Lord  Granville  should  make  every 
effort  to  bring  more  peers  into  the  fold  to  save  the  bill  when  it 
reappeared  in  the  autumn  session.  He  had  himself  "garnered  in 
a  rich  harvest"  of  bishops  in  July.  On  previous  occasions  he  had 
plied  the  episcopal  bench  with  political  appeals,  and  this  time  he 
wrote  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury :  — 

"  July  21, 1884.  I  should  have  felt  repugnance  and  scruple  about 
addressing  your  Grace  at  any  time  on  any  subject  of  a  political 
nature  if  it  were  confined  within  the  ordinary  limits  of  such  sub- 
jects. But  it  seems  impossible  to  refuse  credit  to  the  accounts 
which  assure  us  that  the  peers  of  the  Opposition,  under  Lord  Salis- 
bury and  his  coadjutors,  are  determined  to  use  all  their  strength 
and  influence  for  the  purpose  of  throwing  out  the  Franchise  Bill  in 
the  House  of  Lords;  and  thus  of  entering  upon  a  conflict  with  the 
House  of  Commons,  from  which  at  each  step  in  the  proceeding  it 
may  probably  become  more  difficult  to  retire,  and  which,  if  left  to 
its  natural  course,  will  probably  develop  itself  into  a  constitutional 
crisis  of  such  an  order  as  has  not  occurred  since  1832.  ..." 

To  Tennyson,  the  possessor  of  a  spiritual  power  even  more  than 
archiepiscopal,  who  had  now  a  place  among  peers  temporal,  he 
addressed  a  remonstrance  (July  6) :  — 

".  .  .  Upon  consideration  I  cannot  help  writing  a  line,  for  I  must 
hope  that  you  will  reconsider  your  intention.  The  best  mode  in 
which  I  can  support  a  suggestion  seemingly  so  audacious  is  by  in- 
forming you,  that  all  sober-minded  conservative  peers  are  in  great 


588  English  Historians 

dismay  at  this  wild  proceeding  of  Lord  Salisbury;  that  the  ultra- 
Radicals  and  Parnellites,  on  the  other  hand,  are  in  a  state  of  glee,  as 
they  believe,  and  with  good  reason,  that  the  battle  once  begun  will 
end  in  some  great  humiliation  to  the  House  of  Lords,  or  some 
important  change  in  its  composition.  That  (to  my  knowledge) 
various  bishops  of  conservative  leanings  are,  on  this  account,  going 
to  vote  with  the  government  —  as  may  be  the  case  with  lay  peers 
also.  That  you  are  the  only  peer,  so  far  as  I  know,  associated  with 
Liberal  ideas  or  the  Liberal  party,  who  hesitates  to  vote  against 
Lord  Salisbury." 

In  the  later  stage  of  this  controversy,  Tennyson  shot  the  well- 
known  lines  at  him :  — 

Steersman,  be  not  precipitate  in  thine  act 

Of  steering,  for  the  river  here,  my  friend, 

Parts  in  two  channels,  moving  to  one  end  — 

This  goes  straight  forward  to  the  cataract: 

That  streams  about  the  bend. 

But  tho'  the  cataract  seems  the  nearer  way, 

Whate'cr  the  crowd  on  either  bank  may  say, 

Take  thou  "  the  bend,"  'twill  save  thee  many  a  day. 

To  a  poet  who  made  to  his  generation  such  exquisite  gifts  of 
beauty  and  pleasure,  the  hardest  of  party-men  may  pardon  un- 
seasonable fears  about  franchise  and  one-horse  constituencies.  As 
matter  of  fact  and  in  plain  prose,  this  taking  of  the  bend  was  exactly 
what  the  steersman  had  been  doing,  so  as  to  keep  other  people 
out  of  the  cataracts.  .  .  . 

To  Mr.  Chamberlain,  who  was  in  his  element,  or  in  one  of  his 
elements,  Mr.  Gladstone  wrote  (October  8) :  — 

"I  see  that  Salisbury  by  his  declaration  in  the  Times  of  Satur- 
day, that  the  Lords  are  to  contend  for  the  simultaneous  passing 
of  the  two  bills,  has  given  you  an  excellent  subject  for  denuncia- 
tion, and  you  may  safely  denounce  him  to  your  heart's  content. 
But  I  earnestly  hope  that  you  will  leave  us  all  elbow  room  on 
other  questions  which  may  arise.  If  you  have  seen  my  letters 
(virtually)  to  the  Queen,  I  do  not  think  that  you  will  have  found 
reason  for  alarm  in  them.  I  am  sorry  that  Hartington  the  other 
day  used  the  word  compromise,  a  word  which  has  never  passed  my 
lips,  though  I  believe  he  meant  nothing  wrong.  If  we  could  find 
anything  which,  though  surrendering  nothing  substantial,  would 
build  a  bridge  for  honorable  and  mcxlerate  men  to  retreat  by,  I 
am  sure  you  would  not  object  to  it.  But  I  have  a  much  stronger 
plea  for  your  reserve  than  any  request  of  my  own.  It  is  this,  that 


The  Enfranchisement  of  the  Rural  Laborer      589 

the  Cabinet  has  postponed  discussing  the  matter  until  Wednesday 
simply  in  order  that  you  may  be  present  and  take  your  share. 
They  meet  at  twelve.  I  shall  venture  to  count  on  your  doing  noth- 
ing to  narrow  the  ground  left  open  to  us,  which  is  indeed  but  a 
stinted  one." 

§  5.   Attempts  at  Conciliation 

Three  days  later  (October  n)  the  Queen,  writing  to  the  prime 
minister,  was  able  to  mark  a  further  stage :  — 

"Although  the  strong  expressions  used  by  ministers  in  their 
recent  speeches  have  made  the  task  of  conciliation  undertaken  by 
the  Queen  a  most  difficult  one,  she  is  so  much  impressed  with  the 
importance  of  the  issue  at  stake  that  she  has  persevered  in  her 
endeavors,  and  has  obtained  from  the  leaders  of  the  Opposition 
an  expression  of  their  readiness  to  negotiate  on  the  basis  of  Lord 
Hartington's  speech  at  Hanley.  In  the  hope  that  this  may  lead 
to  a  compromise,  the  Queen  has  suggested  that  Lord  Hartington 
may  enter  into  communication  with  Lord  Salisbury,  and  she  trusts, 
from  Mr.  Gladstone's  telegram  received  this  morning,  that  he  will 
empower  Lord  Hartington  to  discuss  the  possibility  of  an  agree- 
ment with  Lord  Salisbury." 

In  acknowledgment,  Mr.  Gladstone  offered  his  thanks  for  all  her 
Majesty's  "well-timed  efforts  to  bring  about  an  accommodation." 
He  could  not,  however,  he  proceeded,  feel  sanguine  as  to  obtain- 
ing any  concession  from  the  leaders,  but  he  is  very  glad  that  Lord 
Hartington  should  try. 

Happily,  and  as  might  have  been  expected  by  anybody  who 
remembered  the  action  of  the  sensible  peers  who  saved  the  Reform 
Bill  in  1832,  the  rash  and  headstrong  men  in  high  places  in  the 
Tory  party  were  not  allowed  to  have  their  own  way.  Before  the 
autumn  was  over,  prudent  members  of  the  Opposition  became 
uneasy.  They  knew  that  in  substance  the  conclusion  was  fore- 
gone, but  they  knew  also  that  just  as  in  their  own  body  there  was 
a  division  between  hothead  and  moderate,  so  in  the  Cabinet  they 
could  count  upon  a  Whig  section,  and  probably  upon  the  prime 
minister  as  well.  They  noted  his  words  spoken  in  July:  "It  is 
not  our  desire  to  see  the  bill  carried  by  storm  and  tempest.  It  is 
our  desire  to  see  it  win  its  way  by  persuasion  and  calm  discussion 
to  the  rational  minds  of  men." 

Meanwhile  Sir  Michael  Hicks-Beach  had  already,  with  the  knowl- 
edge and  without  the  disapproval  of  other  leading  men  on  the 
Tory  side,  suggested  an  exchange  of  views  to  Lord  Hartington, 


590  English  Historians 

who  was  warmly  encouraged  by  the  Cabinet  to  carry  on  com- 
munications, as  being  a  person  peculiarly  fitted  for  the  task, 
"enjoying  full  confidence  on  one  side,"  as  Mr.  Gladstone  said 
to  the  Queen,  "and  probably  more  on  the  other  side  than  any  other 
minister  could  enjoy."  These  two  cool  and  able  men  took  the 
extension  of  county  franchise  for  granted,  and  their  conferences 
turned  pretty  exclusively  on  redistribution.  Sir  Michael  pressed 
the  separation  of  urban  from  rural  areas,  and  what  was  more  spe- 
cifically important  was  his  advocacy  of  single-member  or  one-horse 
constituencies.  His  own  long  experience  of  a  scattered  agricul- 
tural division  had  convinced  him  that  such  areas  with  household 
suffrage  would  be  unworkable.  Lord  Hartington  knew  the  ad- 
vantage of  two-member  constituencies  for  his  party,  because  they 
made  an  opening  for  one  Whig  candidate  and  one  Radical.  But 
he  did  not  make  this  a  question  of  life  or  death,  and  the  ground  was 
thoroughly  well  hoed  and  raked.  Lord  Salisbury,  to  whom  the 
nature  of  these  communications  had  been  made  known  by  the 
colleague  concerned,  told  him  of  the  suggestion  from  the  Queen, 
and  said  that  he  and  -Sir  Stafford  Northcote  had  unreservedly 
accepted  it.  So  far  the  Cabinet  had  found  the  several  views  in 
favor  with  their  opponents  as  to  electoral  areas  rather  more  sweep- 
ing and  radical  than  their  own  had  been,  and  they  hoped  that  on 
the  basis  thus  informally  laid  they  might  proceed  to  the  more  de- 
veloped conversation  with  the  two  official  leaders.  Then  the  Tory 
ultras  interposed. 

On  the  last  day  of  October  the  Queen  wrote  to  Mr.  Gladstone 
from  Balmoral :  — 

"The  Queen  thinks  that  it  would  be  a  meansof  arriving  at  some 
understanding  if  the  leaders  of  the  parties  in  both  houses  could 
exchange  their  views  personally.  The  Duke  of  Argyll  or  any  other 
person  unconnected  for  the  present  with  the  government  or  the 
Opposition  might  be  employed  in  bringing  about  a  meeting,  and  in 
assisting  to  solve  difficulties.  The  Queen  thinks  the  government 
should  in  any  project  forming  the  basis  of  resolutions  on  redistri- 
bution to  be  proposed  to  the  House  distinctly  define  their  plans 
at  such  a  personal  conference.  The  Queen  believes  that  were 
assurance  given  that  the  redistribution  would  not  be  wholly  in- 
imical to  the  prospects  of  the  Conservative  party,  their  concurrence 
might  be  obtained.  The  Queen  feels  most  strongly  that  it  is  of 
the  utmost  importance  that  in  this  serious  crisis  such  means,  even 
if  unusual,  should  be  tried,  and  knowing  how  fully  Mr.  Gladstone 
recognizes  the  great  danger  that  might  arise  by  prolonging  the 


The  Enfranchisement  of  the  Rural   Laborer      591 

conflict,  the  Queen  earnestly  trusts  that  he  will  avail  himself  of  such 
means  to  obviate  it." 

The  Queen  then  wrote  to  Lord  Salisbury  in  the  same  sense  in 
which  she  had  written  to  the  prime  minister.  Lord  Salisbury 
replied  that  it  would  give  him  great  pleasure  to  consult  with  any- 
body the  Queen  might  desire,  and  that  in  obedience  to  her  com- 
mands he  would  do  all  that  lay  in  him  to  bring  the  controversy 
finally  to  a  just  and  honorable  issue.  He  went  on,  however,  to  say, 
in  the  caustic  vein  that  was  one  of  his  ruling  traits,  that  while 
cheerfully  complying  with  the  Queen's  wishes,  he  thought  it  right 
to  add  that,  so  far  as  his  information  went,  no  danger  attached 
to  the  prolongation  of  the  controversy  for  a  considerable  time, 
nor  did  he  believe  that  there  was  any  real  excitement  in  the  coun- 
try about  it.  The  Queen,  in  replying  (November  5),  said  that 
she  would  at  once  acquaint  Mr.  Gladstone  with  what  he  had  said. 

§  6.   Re-introduction  0}  the  Franchise  Bill 

The  autumn  session  began,  and  the  Franchise  Bill  was  introduced 
again.  Three  days  later,  in  consequence  of  a  communication  from 
the  other  camp,  the  debate  on  the  second  reading  was  conciliatory; 
but  the  Tories  won  a  by-election,  and  the  proceedings  in  committee 
became  menacing  and  clouded.  Discrepancies  abounded  in  the 
views  of  the  Opposition  upon  redistribution.  When  the  third  read- 
ing came  (November  n),  important  men  on  the  Tory  side  insisted 
on  the  production  of  a  Seats  Bill,  and  declared  there  must  be 
no  communication  with  the  enemy.  Mr.  Gladstone  was  elabo- 
rately pacific.  If  he  could  not  get  peace,  he  said,  at  least  let  it  be 
recorded  that  he  desired  peace.  The  parleys  of  Lord  Harting- 
ton  and  Sir  Michael  Hicks-Beach  came  to  an  end. 

Mr.  Gladstone,  late  one  night  soon  after  this  (November  14), 
had  a  long  conversation  with  Sir  Stafford  Northcote  at  the  house 
of  a  friend.  He  had  the  authority  of  the  Cabinet  (not  given  for  this 
special  interview)  to  promise  the  introduction  of  a  Seats  Bill  before 
the  committee  stage  of  the  Franchise  Bill  in  the  Lords,  provided 
he  was  assured  that  it  could  be  done  without  endangering  or  re- 
tarding franchise.  Northcote  and  Mr.  Gladstone  made  good 
progress  on  the  principles  of  redistribution.  Then  came  an 
awkward  message  from  Lord  Salisbury,  that  the  Lords  could  not 
let  the  Franchise  Bill  through,  until  they  got  the  Seats  Bill  from 
the  Commons.  So  negotiations  were  again  broken  off. 

The  only  hope  now  was  that  a  sufficient  number  of  Lord  Salis- 


English  Historians 

bury's  adherents  would  leave  him  in  the  lurch,  if  he  did  not  close 
with  what  was  understood  to  be  Mr.  Gladstone's  engagement,  to 
procure  and  press  a  Seats  Bill  as  soon  as  ever  franchise  was  out  of 
danger.  So  it  happened,  and  the  door  that  had  thus  been  shut 
speedily  opened.  Indirect  communication  reached  the  treasury 
bench  that  seemed  to  show  the  leaders  of  Opposition  to  be  again 
alive.  There  were  many  surmises,  everybody  was  excited,  and 
two  great  Tory  leaders  in  the  Lords  called  on  Lord  Granville 
one  day,  anxious  for  a  modus  vivendi.  Mr.  Gladstone  in  the 
Commons,  in  conformity  with  a  previous  decision  of  the  Cabinet, 
declared  the  willingness  of  the  government  to  produce  a  bill  or  ex- 
plain its  provisions,  on  receiving  a  reasonable  guarantee  that  the 
Franchise  Bill  would  be  passed  before  the  end  of  the  sittings.  The 
ultras  of  the  Opposition  still  insisted  on  making  bets  all  round  that 
the  Franchise  Bill  would  not  become  law;  besides  betting,  they 
declared  they  would  die  on  the  floor  of  the  House  in  resisting  an 
accommodation.  A  meeting  of  the  party  was  summoned  at  the 
Carlton  Club  for  the  purpose  of  declaring  war  to  the  knife,  and 
Lord  Salisbury  was  reported  to  hold  to  his  determination.  This 
resolve,  however,  proved  to  have  been  shaken  by  Mr.  Gladstone's 
language  on  a  previous  day.  The  general  principles  of  redistri- 
bution had  been  sufficiently  sifted,  tested,  and  compared  to  show 
that  there  was  no  insuperable  discrepancy  of  view.  It  was  made 
clear  to  Lord  Salisbury  circuitously,  that  though  the  government 
required  adequate  assurances  of  the  safety  of  franchise  before 
presenting  their  scheme  upon  seats,  this  did  not  preclude  private 
and  confidential  illumination.  So  the  bill  was  read  a  second  time. 

§  7.   Party  Negotiations  and  Compromise 

All  went  prosperously  forward.  On  November  19,  Lord  Salis- 
bury and  Sir  S.  Northcote  came  to  Downing  Street  in  the  after- 
noon, took  tea  with  the  prime  minister,  and  had  a  friendly  conver- 
sation for  an  hour  in  which  much  ground  was  covered.  The  heads 
of  the  government  scheme  were  discussed  and  handed  to  the 
Opposition  leaders.  Mr.  Gladstone  was  well  satisfied.  He  was 
much  struck,  he  said  after,  with  the  quickness  of  the  Tory  leader, 
and  found  it  a  pleasure  to  deal  with  so  acute  a  man.  Lord  Salis- 
bury, for  his  part,  was  interested  in  the  novelty  of  the  proceeding; 
for  no  precedent  could  be  found  in  our  political  or  party  history 
for  the  discussion  of  a  measure  before  its  introduction  between 
the  leaders  of  the  two  sides.  This  novelty  stirred  his  curiosity, 
while  he  also  kept  a  sharp  eye  on  the  main  party  chance.  He 


The  Enfranchisement  of  the  Rural  Laborer      593 

proved  to  be  entirely  devoid  of  respect  for  tradition,  and  Mr. 
Gladstone  declared  himself  to  be  a  strong  conservative  in  com- 
parison. The  meetings  went  on  for  several  days  through  the 
various  parts  of  the  questions,  Lord  Hartington,  Lord  Granville, 
and  Sir  Charles  Dilke  being  also  taken  into  council  —  the  last 
of  the  three  being  unrivalled  master  of  the  intricate  details. 

The  operation  was  watched  with  jealous  eyes  by  the  Radicals, 
though  they  had  their  guardians  in  the  Cabinet.  To  Mr.  Bright 
who,  having  been  all  his  life  denounced  as  a  violent  republican, 
was  now  in  the  view  of  the  new  school  hardly  even  so  much  as  a 
sound  Radical,  Mr.  Gladstone  thought  it  well  to  write  (November 
25)  words  of  comfort,  if  comfort  were  needed:  — 

"I  wish  to  give  you  the  assurance  that  in  the  private  communica- 
tions which  are  now  going  on,  Liberal  principles  such  as  we  should 
conceive  and  term  them  are  in  no  danger.  Those  with  whom  we 
confer  are  thinking  without  doubt  of  party  interests,  as  affected 
by  this  or  that  arrangement;  but  these  are  a  distinct  matter,  and 
I  am  not  so  good  at  them  as  some  others ;  but  the  general  propo- 
sition which  I  have  stated  is  I  think  one  which  I  can  pronounce 
with  some  confidence.  .  .  .  The  whole  operation  is  essentially 
delicate  and  slippery,  and  I  can  hardly  conceive  any  other  cir- 
cumstances in  which  it  would  be  justified,  but  in  the  present  very 
peculiar  case  I  think  it  is  not  only  warranted,  but  called  for." 

On  November  27  all  was  well  over,  and  Mr.  Gladstone  was  able 
to  inform  the  Queen  that  "the  delicate  and  novel  communications" 
between  the  two  sets  of  leaders  had  been  brought  to  a  happy 
termination.  "His  first  duty,"  he  said,  "was  to  tender  his  grate- 
ful thanks  to  your  Majesty  for  the  wise,  gracious,  and  steady  in- 
fluence on  your  Majesty's  part  which  has  so  powerfully  contributed 
to  bring  about  this  accommodation,  and  to  avert  a  serious  crisis 
of  affairs."  He  adds  that  "his  cordial  acknowledgments  are  due 
to  Lord  Salisbury  and  Sir  Stafford  Northcote  for  the  manner  in 
which  they  have  conducted  their  difficult  communications." 
The  Queen  promptly  replied :  "I  gladly  and  thankfully  return  your 
telegrams.  To  be  able  to  be  of  use  is  all  I  care  to  live  for  now." 
By  way  of  winding  up  negotiations  so  remarkable,  Mr.  Gladstone 
wrote  to  Lord  Salisbury  to  thank  him  for  his  kindness,  and  to  say 
that  he  could  have  desired  nothing  better  in  candor  and  equity. 
Their  conversation  on  the  Seats  Bill  would  leave  him  none  but  the 
most  agreeable  recollections.1 

1  Compare  this  account  with  Churchill,  Lord  Randolph  Churchill,  Vol.  I, 
chaps,  vi.  ff. 

2Q 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  CABINET  SYSTEM 

THE  great  measures  which  transformed  England  into  a  political 
democracy  left  untouched  the  outward  forms  of  the  Constitution. 
The  sovereign  retained  nominally  at  least  the  ancient  dignities 
and  prerogatives,  and  the  hereditary  House  of  Lords  continued  to 
hold  its  full  powers  as  an  integral  part  of  the  legislature.  In 
external  forms  the  government  appeared  very  much  as  it  did  in 
the  days  of  Henry  VIII  when  the  king  appointed  and  dismissed 
his  ministers  at  will  and  summoned  Parliament  at  his  pleasure. 
However,  since  that  time  the  practice  had  grown  up  of  compelling 
the  sovereign  to  accept  only  those  ministers  who  had  the  support 
of  a  majority  of  the  House  of  Commons.  This  practice,  which  was 
greatly  furthered  in  the  age  of  Walpole,  became  settled  custom  in 
the  nineteenth  century,  and  must  be  thoroughly  examined  by  any 
one  who  would  know  the  actual  workings  of  the  government 
of  Great  Britain.  In  Mr.  Bagehot's  famous  book  on  the  English 
Constitution  we  have  a  charming  account  of  many  features  of 
the  English  system. 

§  i.   The  Crown  and  Selection  of  Ministers l 

The  efficient  secret  of  the  English  Constitution  may  be  described 
as  the  close  union,  the  nearly  complete  fusion,  of  the  executive 
and  legislative  powers.  No  doubt  by  the  traditional  theory,  as  it 
exists  in  all  the  books,  the  goodness  of  our  Constitution  consists 
in  the  entire  separation  of  the  legislative  and  executive  authorities, 
but  in  truth  its  merit  consists  in  their  singularapproximation.  The 
connecting  link  is  the  Cabinet.  By  that  new  word  we  mean  a  com- 
mittee of  the  legislative  body  selected  to  be  the  executive  body. 

1  Bagehot,  The  English  Constitution,  chap.  ii. 
594 


The  Cabinet  System  595 

The  legislature  has  many  committees,  but  this  is  the  greatest.  It 
chooses  for  this,  its  main  committee,  the  men  in  whom  it  has  most 
confidence.  It  does  not,  it  is  true,  choose  them  directly;  but  it 
is  nearly  omnipotent  in  choosing  them  indirectly.  A  century  ago 
the  crown  had  a  real  choice  of  ministers,  though  it  had  no  longer 
a  choice  in  policy.  During  the  long  reign  of  Sir  R.  Walpole 
he  was  obliged  not  only  to  manage  Parliament,  but  to  manage  the 
palace.  He  was  obliged  to  take  care  that  some  court  intrigue  did 
not  expel  him  from  his  place.  The  nation  then  selected  the  Eng- 
lish policy,  but  the  crown  chose  the  English  ministers.  They  were 
not  only  in  name,  as  now,  but  in  fact,  the  queen's  servants.  Rem- 
nants, important  remnants,  of  this  great  prerogative  still  remain. 
The  discriminating  favor  of  William  IV  made  Lord  Melbourne 
head  of  the  Whig  party  when  he  was  only  one  of  several  rivals.  .  .  . 
But  as  a  rule,  the  nominal  prime  minister  is  chosen  by  the  legis- 
lature, and  the  real  prime  minister  for  most  purposes  —  the  leader 
of  the  House  of  Commons  —  almost  without  exception  is  so. 

§  2.    The  Prime  Minister  and  Choice  of  his  Associates 

There  is  nearly  always  some  one  man  plainly  selected  by  the  voice 
of  the  predominant  party  in  the  predominant  house  of  the  legis- 
lature to  head  that  party,  and  consequently  to  rule  the  nation.  We 
have  in  England  an  elective  first  magistrate  as  truly  as  the  Ameri- 
cans have  an  elective  first  magistrate.  The^queen  is  only  _at -the 
head  of  the  dignified  part  of  the  Constitution.  The  prime  minister 
is  at  the  head  of  the  efficient  part.  The  crown  is,  according  to 
the  saying,  the  "fountain  of  honor";  but  the  treasury  is  the  spring 
of  business.  Nevertheless  our  first  magistrate  differs  from  the 
American.  He  is  not  elected  directly  bv  the  people,  lie  is  elected 
bv_the  representatives  of  the  people.  He  is  an  example  of  "double 
election/'  Trie  legislature  chosen,  in  name,  to  make  laws,  in  fact 
finds  its  principal  business  in  making  and  in  keeping  an  executive. 

The  leading  minister  so  selected  has  to  choose  his  associates, 
but  he  only  chooses  among  a  charmed  circle.  The  position  of  most 
men  in  Parliament  forbids  their  being  invited  to  the  Cabinet;  the 
position  of  a  few  men  insures  their  being  invited.  Between  the 
compulsory  list  whom  he  must  take,  and  the  impossible  list  whom 
he  cannot  take,  a  prime  minister's  independent  choice  in  the  for- 
mation of  a  Cabinet  is  not  very  large ;  it  extends  rather  to  the  divi- 
sion of  the  Cabinet  offices  than  to  the  choice  of  Cabinet  ministers. 
Parliament  and  the  nation  have  pretty  well  settled  who  shall  have 


596  Knglish   Historians 

the  first  places;  but  they  have  not  discriminated  with  the  same 
accuracy  which  man  shall  have  which  place.  The  highest  patron- 
age of  a  prime  minister  is,  of  course,  a  considerable  power,  though 
it  is  exercised  under  close  and  imperative  restrictions  —  though  it 
is  far  less  than  it  seems  to  be  when  stated  in  theory,  or  looked  at 
from  a  distance. 

The  Cabinet,  in  a  word,  is  a  board  of  control  chosen  by  the 
legislature,  out  of  persons  whom  it  trusts  and  knows,  to  rule  the 
nation.  The  particular  mode  in  which  the  English  ministers  are 
selected ;  the  fiction  that  they  are,  in  any  political  sense,  the  queen's 
servants;  the  rule  which  limits  the  choice  of  the  Cabinet  to  the 
members  of  the  legislature  are  accidents  unessential  to  its  definition 
—  historical  incidents  separable  from  its  nature.  Its  characteristic 
is  that  it  should  be  chosen  by  the  legislature  out  of  persons  agreeable 
to  and  trusted  by  the  legislature.  Naturally  these  are  principally 
its  own  members;  but  they  need  not  be  exclusively  so.  A  Cabinet 
which  included  persons  not  members  of  the  legislative  assembly 
might  still  perform  all  useful  duties.  Indeed,  the  peers  who 
constitute  a  large  element  in  modern  Cabinets  are  members,  nowa- 
days, only  of  a  subordinate  assembly. 

The  House  of  Lords  still  exercises  several  useful  functions;  but 
the  ruling  influence,  the  deciding  faculty,  has  passed  to  what, 
using  the  language  of  old  times,  we  still  call  the  Lower  House  — 
to  an  assembly  which,  though  inferior  as  a  dignified  institution, 
is  superior  as  an  efficient  institution.  A  principal  advantage  of 
the  House  of  Lords  in  the  present  age  indeed  consists  in  its  thus 
acting  as  a  reservoir  of  Cabinet  ministers.  Unless  the  composition 
of  the  House  of  Commons  were  improved,  or  unless  the  rules 
requiring  Cabinet  ministers  to  be  members  of  the  legislature  were 
relaxed,  it  would  undoubtedly  be  difficult  to  find,  without  the  Lords, 
a  sufficient  supply  of  chief  ministers.  But  the  detail  of  the  com- 
position of  a  Cabinet,  and  the  precise  method  of  its  choice,  are  not 
to  the  purpose  now. 

§  3.   Principal  Features  oj  the  Cabinet 

The  first  and  cardinal  consideration  is  the  definition  of  a  Cabinet. 
We  must  not  bewilder  ourselves  with  the  inseparable  accidents 
until  we  know  the  necessary  essence.  A  Cabinet  is  a  combining 
committee,  a  hyphen  which  joins,  a  buckle  which  fastens,  the  leg- 
islative part  of  the  State  to  the  executive  part  of  the  State.  In  its 
origin  it  belongs  to  the  one,  in  its  functions  it  belongs  to  the  other. 


The  Cabinet  System  597 

The  most  curious  point  about  the  Cabinet  is  that  so  very  little 
is  known  about  it.  The  meetings  are  not  o'lly  secret  in  theory, 
but  secret  in  reality.  By  the  present  practice  no  official  minute 
in  all  ordinary  cases  is  kept  of  them.  Even  a  private  note  is  dis- 
couraged and«disliked.  The  House  of  Commons,  even  in  its  most 
inquisitive  and  turbulent  moments,  would  scarcely  permit  a  note 
of  a  Cabinet  meeting  to  be  read.  No  minister  who  respected  the 
fundamental  usages  of  political  practice  would  attempt  to  read 
such  a  note.  The  committee,  which  unites  the  law-making  power 
to  the  law-executing  power  which,  by  virtue  of  that  combination, 
is,  while  it  lasts  and  holds  together,  the  most  powerful  body  in  the 
State,  is  a  committee  wholly  secret.  No  description  of  it,  at  once 
graphic  and  authentic,  has  ever  been  given.  It  is  said  to  be  some- 
times like  a  rather  disorderly  board  of  directors,  where  many  speak 
and  few  listen,  though  no  one  knows. 

But  a  Cabinet,  though  it  is  a  committee  of  the  legislative  assembly, 
is  a  committee  with  a  power  which  no  assembly  would,  unless  for 
historical  accidents,  and  after  happy  experience,  have  been  per- 
suaded to  intrust  to  any  committee.  It  is  a  committee  which  can 
dissolve  the  assembly  which  appointed  it;  it  is  a  committee  with  a 
suspensive  veto;  a  committee  with  a  power  of  appeal.  Though 
appointed  by  one  Parliament,  it  can  appeal  if  it  chooses  to  the  next. 
Theoretically,  indeed,  the  power  to  dissolve  Parliament  is  intrusted 
to  the  sovereign  only;  and  there  are  vestiges  of  doubt  whether  in 
all  cases  a  sovereign  is  bound  to  dissolve  Parliament  when  the  Cabi- 
net asks  him  to  do  so.  But  neglecting  such  small  and  dubious 
exceptions,  the  Cabinet  which  was  chosen  by  one  House  of  Com- 
mons has  an  appeal  to  the  next  House  of  Commons. 

The  chief  committee  of  the  legislature  has  the  power  of  dis- 
solving the  predominant  part  of  that  legislature  —  that  which  at  a 
crisis  is  the  supreme  legislature.  The  English  system,  therefore, 
is  not  an  absorption  of  the  executive  power  by  the  legislative 
power;  it  is  a  fusion  of  the  two.  Either  the  Cabinet  legislates  and 
acts,  or  else  it  can  dissolve.  It  is  a  creature,  but  it  has  the  power  of 
destroying  its  creators.  It  is  an  executive  which  can  annihilate  the 
legislature,  as  well  as  an  executive  which  is  the  nominee  of  the 
legislature.  It  was  made,  but  it  can  unmake;  it  was  derivative 
in  its  origin,  but  it  is  destructive  in  its  action. 

This  fusion  of  the  legislative  and  executive  functions  may,  to 
those  who  have  not  much  considered  it,  seem  but  a  dry  and  small 
matter  to  be  the  latent  essence  and  effectual  secret  of  the  English 
Constitution;  but  we  can  only  judge  of  its  real  importance  by 


598  English  Historians 

looking  at  a  few  of  its  principal  effects,  and  contrasting  it  very 
shortly  with  its  great  competitor,  which  seems  likely,  unless  care 
be  taken,  to  outstrip  it  in  the  progress  of  the  world.  That  com- 
petitor is  the  presidential  system.  The  characteristic  of  it  is  that 
the  President  is  elected  from  the  people  by  one  process,  and  the 
House  of  Representatives  by  another.  The  independence  of  the 
legislative  and  executive  powers  is  the  specific  quality  of  presiden- 
tial government,  just  as  their  fusion  and  combination  is  the  precise 
principle  of  Cabinet  government. 

§  4.  Comparison  of  Presidential  and  Cabinet  Systems 

First,  compare  the  two  in  quiet  times.  The  essence  of  a  civil- 
ized age  is,  that  administration  requires  the  continued  aid  of 
legislation.  One  principal  and  necessary  kind  of  legislation  is 
taxation.  The  expense  of  civilized  government  is  continually 
varying.  It  must  vary  if  the  government  does  its  duty.  The 
miscellaneous  estimates  of  the  English  government  contain  an 
inevitable  medley  of  changing  items.  Education,  prison  disci- 
pline, art,  science,  civil  contingencies  of  a  hundred  kinds,  require 
more  money  one  year  and  less  another.  The  expense  of  defence, 
the  naval  and  military  estimates,  vary  still  more  as  the  danger  of 
attack  seems  more  or  less  imminent,  as  the  means  of  retarding 
such  danger  become  more  or  less  costly.  If  the  persons  who  have 
to  do  the  work  are  not  the  same  as  those  who  have  to  make  the 
laws,  there  will  be  a  controversy  between  the  two  sets  of  persons. 
The  tax-imposers  are  sure  to  quarrel  with  the  tax-requirers.  The 
executive  is  crippled  by  not  getting  the  law  it  needs,  and  the  legis- 
lature is  spoiled  by  having  to  act  without  responsibility;  the 
executive  becomes  unfit  for  its  name  since  it  cannot  execute  what 
it  decides  on ;  the  legislature  is  demoralized  by  liberty,  by  taking 
decisions  of  which  others  (and  not  itself)  will  suffer  the  effects. 

In  America  so  much  has  this  difficulty  been  felt  that  a  semi- 
connection  has  grown  up  between  the  legislature  and  the  executive. 
When  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  of  the  Federal  government 
wants  a  tax,  he  consults  upon  it  with  the  chairman  of  the  financial 
committee  of  Congress.  He  cannot  go  down  to  Congress  himself 
and  propose  what  he  wants ;  he  can  only  write  a  letter  and  send  it. 
But  he  tries  to  get  a  chairman  of  the  finance  committee  who  likes 
his  tax;  through  that  chairman  he  tries  to  persuade  the  committee  to 
recommend  such  a  tax;  by  that  committee  he  tries  to  induce  the 
House  to  adopt  that  tax.  But  such  a  chain  of  communications  is 


The  Cabinet  System  599 

liable  to  continual  interruptions;  it  may  suffice  for  a  single  tax 
on  a  fortunate  occasion,  but  will  scarcely  pass  a  complicated 
budget  —  we  do  not  say  in  a  war  or  a  rebellion  —  we  are  now 
comparing  the  Cabinet  system  and  the  presidential  system  in 
quiet  times,  but  in  times  of  financial  difficulty.  Two  clever 
men  never  exactly  agreed  about  a  budget.  We  have  by  present 
practice  an  Indian  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  talking  English 
finance  at  Calcutta,  and  an  English  one  talking  Indian  finance 
in  England.  But  the  figures  are  never  the  same,  and  the  views 
of  policy  are  rarely  the  same.  One  most  angry  controversy  has 
amused  the  world,  and  probably  others  scarcely  less  interesting 
are  hidden  in  the  copious  stores  of  our  Anglo-Indian  correspon- 
dence. 

But  relations  something  like  these  must  subsist  between  the 
head  of  a  finance  committee  in  the  legislature  and  a  finance  min- 
ister in  the  executive.  They  are  sure  to  quarrel,  and  the  result  is 
sure  to  satisfy  neither.  And  when  the  taxes  do  not  yield  as  they 
were  expected  to  yield,  who  is  responsible  ?  Very  likely  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasury  could  not  persuade  the  chairman;  very 
likely  the  chairman  could  not  persuade  his  committee ;  very  likely 
the  committee  could  not  persuade  the  assembly.  Whom,  then, 
can  you  punish ;  whom  can  you  abolish  when  your  taxes  run  short  ? 
There  is  nobody  save  the  legislature  —  a  vast  miscellaneous  body 
difficult  to  punish,  and  the  very  persons  to  inflict  the  punishment. 

Nor  is  the  financial  part  of  administration  the  only  one  which 
requires  in  a  civilized  age  the  constant  support  and  accompani- 
ment of  facilitating  legislation.  All  administration  does  so.  In 
England,  on  a  vital  occasion,  the  Cabinet  can  compel  legislation  by 
the  threat  of  resignation,  and  the  threat  of  dissolution ;  but  neither 
of  these  can  be  used  in  a  presidential  State.  There  the  legislature 
cannot  be  dissolved  by  the  executive  government,  and  it  does  not 
need  a  resignation,  for  it  has  not  to  find  the  successor.  Accord- 
ingly, when  a  difference  of  opinion  arises,  the  legislature  is  forced 
to  fight  the  executive,  and  the  executive  is  forced  to  fight  the 
legislative;  and  so  very  likely  they  contend  to  the  conclusion  of 
their  respective  terms.  There  is,  indeed,  one  condition  of  things  in 
which  this  description,  though  still  approximately  true,  is,  never- 
theless, not  exactly  true,  and  that  is,  when  there  is  nothing  to  fight 
about.  Before  the  Rebellion  in  America,  owing  to  the  vast  dis- 
tance of  other  States,  and  the  favorable  economical  condition  of  the 
country,  there  were  very  few  considerable  objects  of  contention ; 
but  if  that  government  had  been  tried  by  the  English  legislation 


600  English  Historians 

of  the  last  thirty  years,  the  discordant  action  of  the  two  powers, 
whose  constant  cooperation  is  essential  to  the  best  government, 
would  have  shown  itself  much  more  distinctly. 

§  5.   Political  Education  oj  the  Nation 

Nor  is  this  the  worst.  Cabinet  government  educates  the  nation ; 
the  presidential  does  not  educate  it,  and  may  corrupt  it.  It  has 
been  said  that  England  invented  the  phrase,  "Her  Majesty's  op- 
position " ;  that  it  was  the  first  government  which  made  a  criticism 
of  administration  as  much  a  part  of  the  polity  as  administration 
itself.  This  critical  opposition  is  the  consequence  of  Cabinet  gov- 
ernment. The  great  scene  of  debate,  the  great  engine  of  popular 
instruction  and  political  controversy,  is  the  legislative  assembly. 
A  speech  there  by  an  eminent  statesman,  a  party  movement  by  a 
great  political  combination,  are  the  best  means  yet  known  for 
arousing,  enlivening,  and  teaching  a  people.  The  Cabinet  system 
insures  such  debates,  for  it  makes  them  the  means  by  which  states- 
men advertise  themselves  for  future  and  confirm  themselves  in 
present  governments.  It  brings  forward  men  eager  to  speak,  and 
gives  them  occasions  to  speak. 

The  deciding  catastrophes  of  Cabinet  governments  are  critical 
divisions  preceded  by  fine  discussions.  Everything  which  is  worth 
saying,  everything  which  ought  to  be  said,  most  certainly  will  be 
said.  Conscientious  men  think  they  ought  to  persuade  others; 
selfish  men  think  they  would  like  to  obtrude  themselves.  The 
nation  is  forced  to  hear  two  sides  —  all  the  sides,  perhaps,  of  that 
which  most  concerns  it.  And  it  likes  to  hear,  it  is  eager  to  know. 
Human  nature  despises  long  arguments  which  come  to  nothing; 
heavy  speeches  which  precede  no  motion;  abstract  disquisitions 
which  leave  visible  things  where  they  were.  But  all  men  heed 
great  results,  and  a  change  of  government  is  a  great  result.  It  has 
a  hundred  ramifications;  it  runs  through  society;  it  gives  hope 
to  many,  and  it  takes  away  hope  from  many.  It  is  one  of  those 
marked  events  which,  by  its  magnitude  and  its  melodrama,  im- 
press men  even  too  much.  And  debates  which  have  this  catas- 
trophe at  the  end  of  them,  or  may  so  have  it,  are  sure  to  be  listened 
to,  and  sure  to  sink  deep  into  the  national  mind. 

Travellers  even  in  the  Northern  States  of  America,  the  greatest 
and  best  of  presidential  countries,  have  noticed  that  the  nation  was 
"not  specially  addicted  to  politics";  that  they  have  not  a  public 
opinion  finished  and  chastened  as  that  of  the  English  has  been 


The  Cabinet  System  60 1 

finished  and  chastened.  A  great  many  hasty  writers  have  charged 
this  defect  on  the  "Yankee  race,"  on  the  Anglo-American  char- 
acter; but  English  people,  if  they  had  no  motive  to  attend  to 
politics,  certainly  would  not  attend  to  politics.  At  present  there 
is  business  in  their  attention.  They  assist  at  the  determining 
crisis;  they  assist  or  help  it.  Whether  the  government  will  go  out 
or  remain,  is  determined  by  the  debate,  and  by  the  division  in 
Parliament.  And  the  opinion  out  of  doors,  the  secret  pervading 
disposition  of  society,  has  a  great  influence  on  that  division.  The 
nation  feels  that  its  judgment  is  important,  and  it  strives  to  judge. 
It  succeeds  in  deciding  because  the  debates  and  the  discussions 
give  it  the  facts  and  the  arguments. 

But  under  a  presidential  government  a  nation  has,  except  at  the 
electing  moment,  no  influence;  it  has  not  the  ballot  box  before  it; 
its  virtue  is  gone,  and  it  must  Wait  till  its  instant  of  despotism 
again  returns.  It  is  not  incited  to  form  an  opinion  like  a  nation 
under  a  Cabinet  government,  nor  is  it  instructed  like  such  a  nation. 
There  are  doubtless  debates  in  the  legislature,  but  they  are  pro- 
logues without  a  play.  There  is  nothing  of  a  catastrophe  about 
them ;  you  cannot  turn  out  the  government.  The  prize  of  power 
is  not  in  the  gift  of  the  legislature,  and  no  one  cares  for  the  leg- 
islature. The  executive,  the  great  centre  of  power  and  place,  sticks 
irremovable;  you  cannot  change  it  in  any  event.  The  teaching 
apparatus  which  has  educated  our  public  mind,  which  prepares 
our  resolutions,  which  shapes  our  opinions,  does  not  exist.  No 
presidential  country  needs  to  form  daily,  delicate  opinions,  or  is 
helped  'n  forming  them. 

It  might  be  thought  that  the  discussions  in  the  press  would 
supply  the  deficiencies  in  the  Constitution;  that  by  a  reading 
people,  especially,  the  conduct  of  their  government  would  be  as 
carefully  watched,  that  their  opinion  about  it  would  be  as  con- 
sistent, as  accurate,  as  well  considered,  under  a  presidential  as 
under  a  Cabinet  polity.  But  the  same  difficulty  oppresses  the  press 
which  oppresses  the  legislature.  It  can  do  nothing.  It  cannot 
change  the  administration ;  the  executive  was  elected  for  such  and 
such  years,  and  for  such  and  such  years  it  must  last.  People 
wonder  that  so  literary  a  people  as  the  Americans  —  a  people 
who  read  more  than  any  people  who  ever  lived,  who  read  so  many- 
newspapers  —  should  have  such  bad  newspapers.  The  papers 
are  not  so  good  as  the  English,  because  they  have  not  the  same 
motive  to  be  good  as  the  English  papers. 


6oi  English  Historians 


§  6.    The  Press  and  Politics 

At  a  political  "crisis,"  as  we  say,  that  is,  when  the  fate  of  an 
administration  is  unfixed,  when  it  depends  on  a  few  votes,  yet 
unsettled,  upon  a  wavering  and  veering  opinion,  effective  articles 
in  great  journals  become  of  essential  moment.  The  Times  has 
made  many  ministries.  When,  as  of  late,  there  has  been  a  long 
continuance  of  divided  Parliaments,  of  governments  which  were 
without  "  brute  voting  power,"  and  which  depended  on  intellectual 
strength,  the  support  of  the  most  influential  organ  of  English  opin- 
ion has  been  of  critical  moment.  If  a  Washington  newspaper  could 
have  turned  out  Mr.  Lincoln,  there  would  have  been  good  writ- 
ing and  fine  argument  in  the  Washington  newspapers.  But  the 
Washington  newspapers  can  no  more  remove  a  president  during  his 
term  of  place  than  the  Times  can  remove  a  lord  mayor  during  his 
year  of  office.  Nobody  cares  for  a  debate  in  Congress  which 
"comes  to  nothing,"  and  no  one  reads  long  articles  which  have 
no  influence  on  events.  The  Americans  glance  at  the  heads  of 
news  and  through  the  paper.  They  do  not  enter  upon  a  discus- 
sion. They  do  not  think  of  entering  upon  a  discussion  which 
would  be  useless. 

§  7.   Weakness  o]  the  Presidential  Executive 

After  saying  that  the  division  of  the  legislature  and  the  executive 
in  presidential  governments  weakens  the  legislative  power,  it  may 
seem  a  contradiction  to  say  that  it  also  weakens  the  executive  power. 
But  it  is  not  a  contradiction.  The  division  weakens  the  whole 
aggregate  force  of  government  —  the  entire  imperial  power,  and 
therefore  it  weakens  both  its  halves.  The  executive  is  weakened 
in  a  very  plain  way.  In  England  a  strong  Cabinet  can  obtain  the 
concurrence  of  the  legislature  in  all  acts  which  facilitate  its  admin- 
istration ;  it  is  itself,  so  to  say,  the  legislature.  But  a  president 
may  be  hampered  by  the  Parliament,  and  is  likely  to  be  hampered. 
The  natural  tendency  of  the  members  of  every  legislature  is  to  make 
themselves  conspicuous.  They  wish  to  gratify  an  ambition  laud- 
able or  blamable;  they  wish  to  promote  the  measures  they  think 
best  for  the  public  welfare ;  they  wish  to  make  their  will  felt  in  great 
affairs.  All  these  mixed  motives  urge  them  to  oppose  the  execu- 
tive. They  are  embodying  the  purpose  of  others  if  they  aid;  they 
are  advancing  their  own  opinions  if  they  defeat;  they  are  first  if 


The  Cabinet  System  603 

they  vanquish;  they  are  auxiliaries  if  they  support.  The  weak- 
ness of  the  American  executive  used  to  be  the  great  theme  of  all 
critics  before  the  Confederate  Rebellion.  Congress  and  commit- 
tees of  Congress  of  course  impeded  the  executive  when  there  was 
no  coercive  public  sentiment  to  check  and  rule  them. 

But  the  presidential  system  not  only  gives  the  executive  power 
an  antagonist  in  the  legislative  power,  and  so  makes  it  weaker; 
it  also  enfeebles  it  by  impairing  its  intrinsic  quality.  A  Cabinet  is 
elected  by  a  legislature;  and  when  that  legislature  is  composed 
of  fit  persons,  that  mode  of  electing  the  executive  is  the  very  best. 
It  is  a  case  of  secondary  election,  under  the  only  conditions  in 
which  secondary  election  is  preferable  to  primary.  Generally 
speaking,  in  an  electioneering  country  (I  mean  in  a  country  full  of 
political  life,  and  used  to  the  manipulation  of  popular  institutions), 
the  election  of  candidates  to  elect  candidates  is  a  farce.  The 
Electoral  College  of  America  is  so.  It  was  intended  that  the  depu- 
ties when  assembled  should  exercise  a  real  discretion,  and  by  in- 
dependent choice  select  the  President.  But  the  primary  electors 
take  too  much  interest.  They  only  elect  a  deputy  to  vote  for  Mr. 
Lincoln  or  Mr.  Breckenridge,  and  the  deputy  only  takes  a  ticket 
and  drops  that  ticket  in  an  urn.  He  never  chooses  or  thinks  of 
choosing.  He  is  but  a  messenger,  a  transmitter;  the  real  de- 
cision is  in  those  who  chose  him — who  chose  him  because  they  knew 
what  he  would  do. 

It  is  true  that  the  British  House  of  Commons  is  subject  to  the 
same  influences.  Members  are  mostly,  perhaps,  elected  because 
they  vill  vote  for  a  particular  ministry  rather  than  for  purely 
legislative  reasons.  But  —  and  here  is  the  capital  distinction  — 
the  functions  of  the  House  of  Commons  are  important  and  continu- 
ous. It  does  not,  like  the  Electoral  College,  in  the  United  States, 
separate  when  it  has  elected  its  ruler ;  it  watches,  legislates,  seats, 
and  unseats  ministries  from  day  to  day.  Accordingly  it  is  a  real 
electoral  body.  The  Parliament  of  1857,  which,  more  than  any 
other  Parliament  of  late  years,  was  a  Parliament  elected  to  support 
a  particular  premier,  which  was  chosen,  as  Americans  might  say, 
upon  the  "Palmerston  ticket,"  before  it  had  been  in  existence 
two  years  dethroned  Lord  Palmerston.  Though  selected  in  the 
interest  of  a  particular  ministry,  it  in  fact  destroyed  that  ministry. 

A  good  Parliament,  too,  is  a  capital  choosing  body.  If  it  is 
fit  to  make  laws  for  a  country,  its  majority  ought  to  represent  the 
general  average  intelligence  of  that  country;  its  various  members 
ought  to  represent  the  various  special  interests,  special  opinions, 


604  English   Historians 

special  prejudices,  to  be  found  in  that  community.  There  ought 
to  be  an  advocate  for  every  particular  sect,  and  a  vast  neutral  body 
of  no  sect,  homogeneous  and  judicial,  like  the  nation  itself.  Such 
a  body,  when  possible,  is  the  best  selecter  of  executives  that  can  lie 
imagined.  It  is  full  of  political  activity;  it  is  close  to  political  life ; 
it  feels  the  responsibility  of  affairs  which  are  brought  as  it  were  to  its 
threshold;  it  has  as  much  intelligence  as  the  society  in  question 
chances  to  contain.  It  is  what  Washington  and  Hamilton  strove 
to  create  —  an  Electoral  College  of  the  picked  men  of  the  nation. 

The  best  mode  of  appreciating  its  advantages  is  to  look  at  the 
alternative.  The  competing  constituency  is  the  nation  itself,  and 
this  is,  according  to  theory  and  experience,  in  all  but  the  rarest 
cases  a  bad  constituency.  Mr.  Lincoln,  at  his  second  election, 
being  elected  when  all  the  Federal  States  had  set  their  united  hearts 
on  one  single  object,  was  voluntarily  reflected  by  an  actually 
choosing  nation.  He  embodied  the  object  in  which  every  one  was 
absorbed.  But  this  is  almost  the  only  presidential  election  of 
which  so  much  can  be  said.  In  almost  all  cases  the  President  is 
chosen  by  a  machinery  of  caucuses  and  combinations  too  com- 
plicated to  be  perfectly  known  and  too  familiar  to  require  de- 
scription. He  is  not  the  choice  of  the  nation,  he  is  the  choice  of 
the  wire-pullers.  A  very  large  constituency  in  quiet  times  is  the 
necessary,  almost  the  legitimate,  subject  of  electioneering  man- 
agement ;  a  man  cannot  know  that  he  does  not  throw  his  vote  away 
except  he  votes  as  part  of  some  great  organization ;  and  if  he  votes 
as  a  part,  he  abdicates  his  electoral  function  in  favor  of  the  mana- 
gers of  that  association.  The  nation,  even  if  it  chose  for  itself, 
would,  in  some  degree,  be  an  unskilled  body ;  but  when  it  does  not 
choose  for  itself,  but  only  as  latent  agitators  wish,  it  is  like  a  large, 
lazy  man,  with  a  small,  vicious  mind  —  it  moves  slowly,  and  heavily, 
but  it  moves  at  the  bidding  of  a  bad  intention;  it  "means  little, 
but  it  means  that  little  ill." 

§  8.   Influence  of  Separation  of  Powers  on  the  Legislature 

And  as  the  nation  is  less  able  to  choose  than  a  Parliament,  so 
it  has  worse  people  to  choose  out  of.  The  American  legislators  of 
the  last  century  have  been  much  blamed  for  not  permitting  the 
ministers  of  the  President  to  be  members  of  the  assembly;  but, 
with  reference  to  the  specific  end  which  they  had  in  view,  they  saw 
clearly  and  decided  wisely.  They  wished  to  keep  "the  legislative 
branch  absolutely  distinct  from  the  executive  branch";  they 


The  Cabinet  System  605 

believed  such  a  separation  to  be  essential  to  a  good  constitution; 
they  believed  such  a  separation  to  exist  in  the  English,  which  the 
wisest  of  them  thought  the  best  Constitution.  And,  to  the  effec- 
tual maintenance  of  such  a  separation,  the  exclusion  of  the  Presi- 
dent's ministers  from  the  legislature  is  essential.  If  they  are  not 
excluded,  they  become  the  executive,  they  eclipse  the  President 
himself.  A  legislative  chamber  is  greedy  and  covetous;  it  ac- 
quires as  much,  it  concedes  as  little  as  possible.  The  passions  of 
its  members  are  its  rulers;  the  law-making  faculty,  the  most  com- 
prehensive of  the  imperial  faculties,  is  its  instrument;  it  will  take 
the  administration  if  it  can  take  it.  Tried  by  their  own  aims,  the 
founders  of  the  United  States  were  wise  in  excluding  the  min- 
isters from  Congress. 

But  though  this  exclusion  is  essential  to  the  presidential  system 
of  government,  it  is  not  for  that  reason  a  small  evil.  It  causes  the 
degradation  of  public  life.  Unless  a  member  of  the  legislature 
be  sure  of  something  more  than  speech,  unless  he  is  incited  by  the 
hope  of  action,  and  chastened  by  the  chance  of  responsibility,  a 
first-rate  man  will  not  care  to  take  the  place,  and  will  not  do  much 
if  he  does  take  it.  To  belong  to  a  debating  society  adhering  to  an 
executive  (and  this  is  no  inapt  description  of  a  Congress  under  a 
presidential  constitution)  is  not  an  object  to  stir  a  noble  ambition, 
and  is  a  position  to  encourage  idleness.  The  members  of  a  Parlia- 
ment excluded  from  office  can  never  be  comparable,  much  less 
equal,  to  those  of  a  Parliament  not  excluded  from  office.  The 
presidential  government,  by  its  nature,  divides  political  life  into 
two  halves:  an  executive  half  and  a  legislative  half;  and,  by  so 
dividing  it,  makes  neither  half  worth  a  man's  having  —  worth 
his  making'  it  a  continuous  career,  worthy  to  absorb,  as  Cabinet 
government  absorbs,  his  whole  soul.  The  statesmen  from  whom 
a  nation  chooses  under  a  presidential  system  are  much  inferior  to 
those  from  whom  it  chooses  under  a  Cabinet  system,  while  the 
selecting  apparatus  is  also  far  less  discerning. 

§  9.  Cabinet  and  Presidential  Government  in  Critical  Times 

All  these  differences  are  more  important  at  critical  periods, 
because  government  itself  is  more  important.  A  formed  public 
opinion,  a  respectable,  able,  and  disciplined  legislature,  a  well- 
chosen  executive,  a  Parliament  and  an  administration  not  thwarting 
each  other,  but  cooperating  with  each  other,  are  of  greater  con- 
sequence when  great  affairs  are  in  progress  than  when  small  affairs 


606  English  Historians 

are  in  progress;  when  there  is  much  to  do  than  when  there  is  little 
to  do.  But  in  addition  to  this,  a  Parliamentary  or  Cabinet  consti- 
tution possesses  an  additional  and  special  advantage  in  very  dan- 
gerous times.  It  has  what  we  may  call  a  reserve  of  power  fit  for 
and  needed  by  extreme  exigencies. 

The  principle  of  popular  government  is  that  supreme  power, 
the  determining  efficacy  in  matters  political,  resides  in  the  people  — 
not  necessarily  or  commonly  in  the  whole  people,  in  the  numerical 
majority,  but  in  a  chosen  people,  a  picked  and  selected  people. 
It  is  so  in  England ;  it  is  so  in  all  free  countries.  Under  a  Cabinet 
constitution  at  a  sudden  emergency  this  people  can  choose  a  ruler 
for  the  occasion.  It  is  quite  possible  and  even  likely  that  he  would 
not  be  the  ruler  before  the  occasion.  The  great  qualities,  the  im- 
perious will,  the  rapid  energy,  the  eager  nature  fit  for  a  great  crisis 
are  not  required  —  are  impediments  —  in  common  times.  A 
Lord  Liverpool  is  better  in  everyday  politics  than  a  Chatham;  a 
Louis  Philippe  far  better  than  a  Napoleon.  By  the  structure  of 
the  world  we  often  want,  at  the  sudden  occurrence  of  a  grave  tem- 
pest, to  change  the  helmsman,  to  replace  the  pilot  of  the  calm  by 
the  pilot  of  the  storm. 

In  England  we  have  had  so  few  catastrophes  since  our  Consti- 
tution attained  maturity  that  we  can  hardly  appreciate  this  latent 
excellence.  We  have  not  needed  a  Cavour  to  rule  a  revolution  — 
a  representative  man  above  all  men  fit  for  a  great  occasion,  and  by 
a  natural,  legal  mode  brought  in  to  rule.  But  even  in  England, 
at  what  was  the  nearest  to  a  great  sudden  crisis  which  we  have 
had  of  lace  years,  at  the  Crimean  difficulty,  we  used  this  inherent 
power.  We  abolished  the  Aberdeen  Cabinet,  the  ablest  we  have 
had,  perhaps,  since  the  Reform  Act  —  a  Cabinet  not  only  adapted, 
but  eminently  adapted,  for  every  sort  of  difficulty  save  the  one  it 
had  to  meet,  which  abounded  in  pacific  discretion,  and  was  want- 
ing only  in  the  "daemonic  element";  we  chose  a  statesman  who 
had  the  sort  of  merit  then  wanted,  who,  when  he  feels  the  steady 
power  of  England  behind  him,  will  advance  without  reluctance, 
and  will  strike  without  restraint.  As  was  said  at  the  time,  "We 
turned  out  the  Quaker,  and  put  in  the  pugilist." 

But  under  a  presidential  government  you  can  do  nothing  of  the 
kind.  The  American  government  calls  itself  a  government  of  the 
supreme  people ;  but  at  a  quick  crisis,  the  time  when  a  sovereign 
power  is  most  needed,  you  cannot  find  the  supreme  people.  You 
have  got  a  Congress  elected  for  one  fixed  period,  going  out  perhaps 
by  fixed  instalments,  which  cannot  be  accelerated  or  retarded ;  you 


The  Cabinet  System  607 

have  a  President  chosen  for  a  fixed  period,  and  immovable  dur- 
ing that  period :  all  the  arrangements  are  for  stated  times.  There 
is  no  elastic  element;  everything  is  rigid,  specified,  dated.  Come 
what  may,  you  can  quicken  nothing  and  can  retard  nothing.  You 
have  bespoken  your  government  in  advance,  and  whether  it  suits 
you  or  not,  whether  it  works  well  or  works  ill,  whether  it  is  what 
you  want  or  not,  by  law  you  must  keep  it.  In  a  country  of  com- 
plex foreign  relations  it  would  mostly  happen  that  the  first  and 
most  critical  year  of  every  war  would  be  managed  by  a  peace 
premier,  and  the  first  and  most  critical  years  of  peace  by  a  war 
premier.  In  each  case  the  period  of  transition  would  be  irrevo- 
cably governed  by  a  man  selected  not  for  what  he  was  to  introduce, 
but  what  he  was  to  change ;  for  the  policy  he  was  to  abandon,  not 
for  the  policy  he  was  to  administer. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Burgess,  Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law,  Vol.  II,  pp.  209  ff. 
Dicey,  The  Law  of  the  Constitution,  chap,  i,  on  the  nature  of  parliamentary 
government;  chaps,  xiv  and  xv,  on  the  conventions  of  the  constitution  and 
their  sanction.  Anson,  Law  and  Custom  oj  the  Constitution,  Vol.  II,  chap.  iii. 
Blauvelt,  The  Development  of  Cabinet  Government  in  England. 


CHAPTER  VI 

LABOR  AND   SOCIALISM  IN   ENGLISH   POLITICS 

THE  general  direction  of  the  political  movements  and  legislation 
in  Great  Britain  during  the  lopf  ""*  J»««^«^  IT*1?  "f*  k****"  ^^^r- 
mined  by  the  interests  and  ideals  of  the  three  great  economic- 
classes:  landlords,  capitalists,  and  workingmen.  The  following 
article,  written  almost  twenty  years  ago  by  Mr.  Clarke,  is  a  most 
suggestive  and  interesting  commentary  on  the  conflicts  of  these 
classes  and  the  recent  tendencies  in  legislation  for  social  reform. 
As  Mr.  Clarke  prophesies  at  the  close,  the  labor  party  has  grown 
in  influence  and  numbers.  Two  new  labor  groups  have  been 
added  to  the  Social  Democratic  Federation  which  he  describes 
The  Independent  Labor  party  was  organized  at  Bradford  in 
1 893  with  a  distinctive  socialist  programme  ine  Labor  Represcn- 
tation  uommitteeTsupported  by  trades  unionists,  socialists,  and 
labor  sympathizers,  was  established  in  1900.  The  latter  organiza- 
tion is  designed  to  promote  the  interests  of  the  working-class  and 
aims  at  securing  the  election  of  working-class  representatives  to 
Parliament.  The  result  of  this  labor  and  socialist  activity  was  the 
return  of  upwards  of  fifty  socialist  and  labor  representatives  at 
the  election  held  in  1906.  Part  of  these  representatives  form  a 
distinct  group  and  promise  to  wield  no  little  influence  in  the 
shaping  of  legislation.  It  remains  to  be  seen  whether  this  is 
a  temporary  revolt  against  special  grievances  concerning  educa- 
tion and  labor  legislation,  or  whether  it  is  the  beginning  of  a  com- 
pact labor  party  in  some  measure  comparable  to  the  socialist 
party  in  Germany. 

608 


Labor  and  Socialism  in  English  Politics        609 


§  i.   Definition  of  the  Term  Socialism  * 

Some  years  ago  a  well-known  English  politician  and  political 
economist  is  reported  to  have  said  that  whatever  might  be  the 
case  in  continental  countries,  socialism  was  impossible  in  England, 
and  that  any  socialist  propaganda  there  would  prove  a  ridiculous 
fiasco.  The  remark  seemed  to  suggest  that  insular  habit  of  thought 
often  attributed  to  Englishmen,  which  presupposes  an  insur- 
mountable barrier  between  Great  Britain  and  the  Continent.  But 
whether  that  was  so  or  not,  the  remark  was  unfortunate  in  view  of 
the  very  striking  socialistic  development  which  has  since  obtained 
in  England.  Probably  no  person  equally  well  informed  would 
venture  to  make  a  similar  observation  at  the  present  time. 

For  good  or  evil  the  socialist  movement  has  obtained  something 
more  than  a  foothold  in  England,  while  British  legislation  partakes 
more  and  more  of  the  nature  of  quasi-socialist  enactments.  To 
so  great  an  extent  is  this  the  case  that  an  amiable  and  estima- 
ble peer,  Lord  Wemyss,  recently  called  attention  in  the  House  of 
Lords  to  the  spread  of  socialism,  and  charged  both  political  parties 
with  pandering  to  it  in  their  legislation.  The  most  eminent 
English  thinker,  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  has  also  been  moved  to 
take  up  his  parable  against  socialism  in  a  little  volume  entitled 
The  Man  versus  the  State.  And  quite  recently  no  less  im- 
portant a  person  than  Sir  William  Harcourt  exclaimed  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  "We  are  all  socialists  now."  No  one 
supposes  that  Sir  William  Harcourt  uses  the  term  socialist 
in  the  same  sense  as  Marx  used  it  or  as  it  is  used  by  any 
socialist  party  in  any  civilized  country.  By  socialism  Marx 
meant  the  collective  ownership  of  the  instruments  of  production, 
while  by  the  same  term,  Sir  William  Harcourt  probably  signifies 
the  regulation  by  law  of  the  relations  between  those  who  own 
these  instruments  and  those  who  work  on  some  fixed  wage  or  pay 
a  competition  rent  to  the  owners.  And  no  doubt  this  distinc- 
tion is  real  and  important.  But  it  remains  to  be  seen  whether 
such  an  admission  of  the  doctrine  of  "ransom,"  as  Professor 
Sidgwick  has  recently  sanctioned  in  the  Contemporary  Review, 
or  the  regulation  of  rents  by  the  State,  as  in  Ireland  under  the 
Gladstone  Land  Act,  will  not  ultimately  tend  to  that  further  and 
more  complete  socialism  which  is  advocated  by  the  Collectivist 

1  Reprinted  from  the  Political  Science  Quarterly,  Vol.  Ill,  1888 
pp.  549  ff.  By  permission  of  Ginn  &  Company,  Publishers. 

2  R 


610  English  Historians 

party.  The  present  paper  proposes  not  so  much  to  discuss  this 
interesting  question  as  to  consider  briefly  the  actual  course  of 
English  political  development  and  to  elucidate  the  present  con- 
dition of  things  in  Great  Britain.  Are  Lord  Wemyss,  Mr.  Spencer, 
and  Sir  William  Harcourt  correct  in  their  diagnosis,  or  was  the 
above-mentioned  political  economist  right  in  saying  that  socialism 
was  impossible  in  England  ? 

The  word  socialism  has  perhaps  merited  its  claim  to  be  one  of 
the  great  words  of  the  modern  world  by  reason  of  the  different 
constructions  which  may  be  put  upon  it  —  just  like  the  words 
liberty  and  Christianity,  which  are  also  used  in  the  loosest  possible 
way.  The  word  socialist  is  used  here  in  its  strictest  economic 
sense.  A  socialist  is  one  who  believes  that  the  necessary  instru- 
ments of  production  should  be  held  and  organized  by  the  commu- 
nity, instead  of  by  individuals  or  groups  of  individuals  within  or 
outside  of  that  community.  There  may  be  infinite  differences  of 
opinion  as  to  the  way  in  which  that  result  should  be  brought 
about;  there  may  be  an  indefinite  variety  of  connotations  and 
inferences  concerning  the  bearing  of  the  new  economic  doctrine 
on  religion,  marriage,  the  family,  and  so  forth.  The  adoption  of 
socialism  may  involve  fundamental  changes  in  the  whole  structure 
of  our  social  life,  but  with  all  this  for  the  time  we  have  nothing  to 
do.  .  .  .  The  socialist,  then,  for  my  purpose,  is  one  who  would 
transfer  gradually  or  otherwise,  by  direct  or  indirect  means,  the 
ownership  of  the  instruments  of  production  (land,  mines,  telegraphs, 
railways,  machinery,  banks  of  issue)  from  individuals  to  the  com- 
munity. And  the  questions  we  have  now  to  ask  and  answer  are 
Is  England  becoming  in  this  sense  socialist,  or  is  socialism  in  this 
sense  possible  or  impossible  in  England?  And  further,  Have 
any  recent  movements  helped  to  bring  about  any  marked  change 
in  the  course  of  public  thought  and  of  public  legislation  ? 

§  2.   Development  of  the  Laisser-jaire  Policy 

And  first  we  must  observe  that  interference  by  legislation  with 
"private  enterprise"  has  been  steadily  increasing  in  England  dur- 
ing the  last  seventy  years.     The  zenith  of  the  laisser-jalre  theory 
attained  about  the  beginning  of  the  present   (nineteenth) 
fotury,  ever  since  which  it  has  declined  until  it  is  now  practically 
jandoned.     Early  in  the  century,  England  was  engaged  in  the 
lost  gigantic  of  her  many  wars  —  a  war  carried  on  by  a  great 
Jommercial  minister  for  preeminently  commercial  ends.    The 


Labor  and  Socialism  in  English  Politics        611 

real  character  of  the  struggle  between  Pitt  and  Napoleon  has  been 
largely  lost  sight  of,  owing  to  a  cloud  of  vague  phrases  about 
patriotism,  liberty,  and  religion.  No  doubt  there  came  ultimately 
an  issue  between  Napoleonic  despotism  and  European  liberty. 
But  Pitt  himself  was  under  no  illusions.  He  cared  little  or  noth- 
ing for  the  picturesque  corruptions  and  historical  traditions  which 
appealed  to  the  imagination  of  Burke.  Pitt  started  as  a  reformer, 
imbued  with  the  doctrines  of  Adam  Smith,  and  as  a  reformer  he 
remained  in  intellect  even  while  he  was  giving  his  immense  talent 
to  the  service  of  reaction.  In  theories  of  commercial  legislation 
he  was  far  ahead  of  any  contemporary  statesman,  and  he  believed 
all  along  in  a  reformed  Parliament  and  in  religious  liberty.  Pitt 
never  backed  up  the  continental  coalition  against  France  for  the 
sake  of  "altar  and  throne."  He  had  a  much  more  tangible  object 
in  view,  viz. :  to  secure  for  his  country  undisputed  commercial 
supremacy.  His  aim  was  to  complete  the  edifice  begun  by  Will- 
iam III  and  the  Whigs  of  1688,  and  continued  by  Walpole  and 
Chatham. 

One  of  the  chief  meanings  of  1688   was  the  transference  of 
the  government  into  the  hands  of  the  moneyed -.class.     It  was  ' 
the  period  of  the  formation  of  the  national  debt  and  the  Hank  of    j 
England;    and  under  Pitt  the  classes  interested  in  the  national 
debt  and  the  Bank  of  England  became  supreme  in  the  State.  < 
The  boroughmongers  and  the  rich  Indian  nabobs  possessed  them- 
selves of  Parliament,  and  the  "old  nobility"  was  swamped  with 
successful  contractors  and  wealthy  fundholders.     The  capital  con- 
trolled by  this  class  was  used  by  the  ideal  statesman  of  the  class 
to  secure  the  supremacy  of  the  class.     The  policy  of  laisser  faire 
was  the  special  invention  of  that  class.  \ 

At  the  same  time  a  new  class,  that  of  the  manufacturers^  waii 
rising"  into  power.     The  inventions  of  Arkwright  and  Cromptonl\ 
date  from  the  latter  half  of  the  eighteenth  century,  during  which  \ 
period   England's  great   cotton    manufacture   grew   to   imposing  ) 
proportions.     Aided  by  the  new  machinery,  by  an  abundant  sup- 
ply of  minerals,  by  England's  insular  position,  and  by  the  genius 
of  the  people  for  industry,  the  manufacturing  class  became  power- 
ful, and  those  ugly  places,  the  large  industrial  towns  of  England, 
began  to  grow  to  enormous  size.     The  English  manufacturers  were 
originally  protectionists,  as  witness  Irish  commercial  legislation  and 
the  general  colonial  policy  which  they  supported.     But  as  soon  as 
their  position  was  secure,  it  was  obvious  that  they  would  become 
free  traders  and  advocates  o{  laisser  faire,  and  the  subsequent 


612  English   Historians 

free-trade  legislation  of  Peel  marked  perhaps  the  culmination  of 
their  power. 

§  3.   Laisser-jaire  Policy  Challenged 

ito  But  the  reign  of  laisser  jaire  was  soon  challenged,  and  why? 
WBecause  of  the  growth  of  machine  industry,  the  consequent  dis- 
XJplacement  of  labor,  and  the  new  discomfort  and  dislocations  which 
had  arisen.  The  horrible  cruelties  of  the  early  factory  and  mine 
system  in  England  have  been  so  fully  laid  bare  by  official  docu- 
ments that  any  attempt  to  tell  over  again  the  tale  of  horror  is  super- 
fluous. The  foundations  of  England's  greatness  were  cemented 
by  the  blood  of  English  working  classes.  But  apart  from  the 
cruelty  perpetrated,  two  other  results  connected  themselves  with 
the  new  era.  The  question  of  the  unemployed  arose  as  the  direct 
result  of  machine  industry,  and  the  tendency  of  wages  toward  a 
minimum  ma  aifested  itself  in  the  absence  of  any  organization  on 
the  part  of  the  workers.  Obviously  laisser  faire  was  an  impossible 
policy;  society  simply  could  not  hold  together  on  any  such  ba>is. 
The  attacks  "made  upon  machinery  by  starving  \\i-avers  may  have 
been  foolish;  but  the  weavers  saw  clearly  that  in  some  way  or 
other  the  new  machines  had  altered  their  position,  had  rendered 
life  harder  for  the  many,  and  employment  more  precarious.  It 
was  impossible  to  permit  the  new  industrial  relationship  to  be  un- 
controlled. Thus  English  statesmen  abandoned  laisser  jaire.  not 
because  of  any  abstract  ideas  about  the  functi<>n>  of  the  State, 
but  simply  because  they  were  compelled  by  the  pressure  of  facts* . 
The  first  of  a  long  series  6T~e!rartTTTe~nts"for  the  protection  of  tabor 
was-passeiLln  1802 ;  it^was  the  beginning  of  the  end  of  laisser 
\aire, 

~B~ut  it  is  commonly  assumed  that  the  whole  Liberal  and 
Radical  movement  in  England  has  been  essentially  a  movement 
having  for  its  watchwords  liberty,  absence  of  state  regulation, 
freedom  of  contract.  Is  this  so?  What  may  be  roughly  termed 
the  Liberal  movement  in  England  has  its  origin  in  three  distinct 
schools  :  (i)  There  were  those  Whigs  who  adhered  to  Fox  and 
who  regarded  with  friendly  eyes  the  proceedings  of  the  French 
Revolutionists  up  till  the  time  of  the  September  massacres  and  who 
even  after  that  date  wished  well  to  the  French  republic.  This 
class  was  never  large,  and  it  was  demoralized  by  the  temporary 
withdrawal  of  Fox  from  Parliament.  (2)  There  was  next  the  small 
Benthamite  School  (to  use  a  convenient  phrase),  of  whom  Price 
and  Priestly  were  active  apostles,  whose  doctrines  were  summed  up 


Labor  and  Socialism  in   English   Politics         613 

in  Godwin's  Political  Justice,  and  whose  Nestor  was  the  venerable 
Jeremy  Bentham.  This  school  of  political  thought  was  clearly 
affiliated  with  that  of  the  French  philosophes;  its  members  were 
ardent  and  zealous  reformers,  thoroughly  imbued  with  the  critical 
ideas  of  the  eighteenth  century,  and  believers  in  the  "perfectability 
of  the  species."  (3)  There  was  also  the  popular  school,  which 
derived  its  main  inspiration  from  Thomas  Paine,  and  whose  lead- 
ers and  orators  were  Cobbett,  Cartwright,  and  Hunt.  This  school 
was  of  the  rough  and  ready  order  ;  its  members  did  not  speculate 
very  deeply,  but  they  saw  clearly  the  abuses  under  which  the 
country  was  suffering,  and  they  were  honestly  desirous  of  improv- 
ing the  condition  of  the  people  as  well  as  vehemently  opposed  to 
the  court,  the  aristocracy,  and  the  Church.  If  any  one  man  can 
be  said  to  be  the  father  of  popular  English  radicalism,  Thomas 
Paine  is  that  man:  his  mark  is  upon  it  to-day.  All  these  three 
schools  went  to  the  making  up  of  the  English  progressive  move- 
ment of  the  earlier  part  of  the  nineteenth  century.  Can  it  be  said 
that  a  party  thus  composed  was  favorable  to  laisser  jaire  ? 

The  truth  is  that  the  movement  was  of  a  complex  character, 
having  diverse  and  even  contradictory  aims.  Some  of  its  leaders 
were  mainly  interested  in  getting  rid  of  abuses,  others  in  affirming 
new  political  ideas.  Some  wanted  to  make  a  bonfire  of  old  statutes 
and  abolish  laws  restricting  freedom  of  speech,  publication,  and 
worship.  The  politics  of  Bentham  and  Godwin  were  certainly 
favorable  to  that  creed  of  "administrative  Nihilism"  for  which 
Mr.  Spencer  now  stands  sponsor.  But  the  popular  side  of  the 
movement  was  even  then  dominated  by  quite  different  aims  and 
had  a  distinctly  socialistic  tinge:  Cobbett  inveighed  against  the 
fundholders  and  the  debt;  Thomas  Spence  of  Newcastle  pub- 
lished his  able  and  interesting  scheme  of  land  nationalization; 
Robert  Owen  was  preaching  theoretic  and  practising  actual  so- 
cialism. It  is  a  fundamental  error  to  suppose  that  English  radi- 
calism was  originally  a  new  creed  as  to  political  machinery;  it 
had  a  social  doctrine  however  ill  formulated.  And  with  respect 
even  to  such  a  writer  as  Godwin,  it  must  be  remembered  that  his 
Political  Justice  was  written  before  the  effects  of  machine  in- 
dustry had  become  visible.  Like  the  French  declaration  of  the 
Rights  of  Man,  it  was  not  so  much  a  prophecy  of  the  new  era  as  the 
summing  up  of  the  old;  it  represented  the  logical  issue  of  a  free 
individualism  under  simple  economic  conditions,  rather  than  the 
necessary  political  results  of  the  new  system  of  collective  industry. 

The  various  groups  were  united  so  long  as  all  were  equally 


6 14  English  Historians 

opposed  to  Tory  rule;  but  the  Liberal  reaction  of  1830  and  the 
compromising  legislation  which  followed  had  the  effect  of  break- 
ing up  this  unity.  The  Whigs  forgot  their  reforming  zeal  in  the 
delights  of  office;  literary  Radicalism  of  the  so-called  philosophic 
order  got  into  the  hands  of  writers  like  James  Mill,  who  had  little 
else  to  offer  but  a  series  of  negations,  and  the  popular  Radical  move- 
ment merged  into  Chartism. 

An  adequate  history  of  the  Chartist  movement  has  yet  to  be 
written.  In  every  way  it  was,  as  Carlyle  perceived,  a  movement 
of  deep  importance.  While  it  put  forward  a  distinctly  political 
programme,  it  had  undoubtedly  ulterior  social  and  economic  aims. 
This  may  be  gathered  from  a  study  of  the  speeches  and  writings 
connected  with  the  movement,  especially  those  of  Ernest  Jones 
and  Bronterre  O'Brien.  It  was  the  only  genuine,  earnest,  serious, 
popular  movement  in  England  since  the  days  of  the  Commonwealth. 
It  was  an  absolutely  English  creation,  due  in  no  sense  to  foreign 
initiative,  and  it  was  environed  by  a  quasi-socialistic  atmosphere. 
Its  authors  desired  to  gain  political  power  in  order  to  improve  the 
condition  of  English  workingmen. 

Had  the  working  classes  been  enfranchised  and  had  no  compet- 
ing programmes  been  set  before  them,  Chartism  would  certainly 
have  triumphed,  and  the  subsequent  course  of  English  politics 
would  have  been  widely  different  from  what  it  has  been.  But 
neither  of  these  conditions  obtained.  The  working  classes  were 
not  in  possession  of  the  suffrage,  and  a  new  factor  came  into  the 
field  in  the  shape  of  Cobdenism,  or  Manchesterismus,  as  the 
uncouth  tongue  of  Germany  has  it. 

§  4.   The  Triumph  of  Cobdenism 

I  have  said  above,  that,  when  they  felt  their  ability  to  compete 
in  the  world's  market  with  success,  it  was  natural  that  the  English 
manufacturers  should  be  friendly  to  laisser  }aire.  That  they  were 
so  is  shown  in  their  support  of  Cobdenism.  The  movement 
directed  with  so  much  sagacity  by  Cobden  was  essentially 
a  middle  class,  business-men's  movement.  Its  triumph  signified 
the  supremacy  of  the  manufacturer.  Cobden  himself  as  quoted 
in  Mr.  John  Morley's  biography  (chapter  xiii)  asserted  that  his 
aim  was  to  make  the  middle  classes  absolute  masters  of  the  State, 
and  he  temporarily  succeeded  in  doing  so.  That  Cobdenism 
should  ever  have  been  regarded  as  a  "popular"  movement,  that 
free  trade  should  ever  have  been  supposed  to  be  a  "popular"  vie- 


Labor  and  Socialism  in  English  Politics        615 

tory,  can  only  be  attributed  to  one  of  those  hallucinations  which 
are  stronger  and  more  enduring  in  politics  and  religion  than  in  any 
other  departments  of  human  affairs.  It  is  certain  that  neither  the 
aristocracy  nor  the  working-class  leaders  so  regarded  it.  The 
latter  perceived  that  their  Chartist  movement  was  beaten  by  the 
free-trade,  middle-class  movement  —  a  fact  also  noted  by  Emer- 
son, who  was  sojourning  in  England  at  that  time;  and  they  have 
not  recovered  their  position  even  to  this  day.  The  Cobdenite 
victory  is  easily  explained.  The  Cobden  School  came  to  the  front 
at  a  time  when  the  old  Whiggism  was  dying  out.  It  had  able  men  at 
its  head,  a  simple  programme  of  a  highly  practical  character,  and 
it  was  able  to  draw  to  an  unlimited  extent  upon  the  immense 
revenues  of  the  manufacturing  class  behind  it.  It  appealed,  more- 
over, to  a  middle-class  electorate. 

Thus  armed  Cobdenism  stormed  successfully  the  citadel  of 
Liberalism  and  held  it  for  a  whole  generation.  It  is  this  quite 
natural  (but  entirely  misleading)  identification  of  Cobdenism  with 
the  progressive  movement  in  England  which  has  induced  people  to 
suppose  that  English  Radicalism  means  mere  absence  of  restric- 
tion, or  "administrative  Nihilism."  It  means  nothing  of  the  sort. 
Cobdenism  was  an  intruder  in  the  line  of  legitimate  succession,  and 
we  shall  see  directly  that  the  Radicalism  of  to-day  is  taking  up  the 
thread  of  the  Chartist  movement.  .  .  . 

§  5.  Growth  of  State  Interference 

The  purely  middle-class  regime  came  to  an  end  (the  year  of 
Palmerston's  death  curiously  coinciding  with  that  of  Cobden)  and 
the  period  of  proletarian  pressure  began,  or  rather,  to  be  more 
strictly  accurate,  the  pressure  which  had  been  felt  to  some  extent 
from  without  now  manifested  itself  within  the  political  parties 
to  a  far  greater  degree.  The  security  of  the  ballot  was  given  to  the 
working  classes,  legislation  on  social  questions  became  much  more 
frequent  and  advanced  in  its  tendencies,  and,  above  all,  a  state 
system  of  public  education  was  adopted  with  the  consent  of  both 
parties.  The  so-called  Conservative  reaction  of  1874  was  due  in 
far  greater  degree  to  Liberal  quarrels  and  divisions  than  to  any  new 
manifestation  of  genuine  Conservatism.  That  there  was  really  no 
reaction  against  state  interference  was  proved  by  the  acts  of  1875 
providing  for  artisans'  dwellings  and  for  the  full  recognition  of 
trades  unions,  by  the  merchant  shipping  legislation  of  the  same 
year,  and  by  the  extension  and  completion  of  the  system  of 


616  English  Historians 

compulsory  education  in  1876.  The  Disraeli  administration  ac- 
complished very  little  in  domestic  legislation;  but  what  it  did 
accomplish  was  certainly  in  the  direction  of  public  intervention 
between  capital  and  labor,  nominally  if  not  practically  in  the 
interests  of  labor. 

This  tendency  toward  quasi-socialistic  legislation  became  much 
more  manifest  under  the  Gladstone  administration  of  1880,  for  two 
of  the  most  important  measures  of  the  very  first  year  of  the  new 
government  were  severe  blows  to  the  laisser-jaire  theory.  These 
were  the  Irish  Compensation  for  Disturbance  Bill  and  the  Employ- 
ers' Liability  Bill.  The  former  measure,  it  is  true,  was  lost  through 
the  action  of  the  House  of  Lords ;  but  this  does  not  lessen  its  impor- 
tance as  an  indication  of  the  socialistic  tendency  of  the  Liberal 
legislation.  During  the  Gladstone  regime  the  functions  of  the 
post-office  were  greatly  enlarged  by  the  adoption  of  the  parcels 
post  system  whereby  private  enterprise  has  been  greatly  checked. 
The  electric  lighting  legislation  and  the  claim  asserted  by  the 
government  over  the  telephones  also  mark  the  same  drift  towards 
collective  control  and  ownership. 

What  are  the  functions,  then,  with  which  we  find  the  British 
government  invested  at  the  present  time  at  home  and  in  its 
Indian  dependency  ?  The  government  has  rendered  popular  edu- 
cation compulsory ;  it  has  truck  acts  to  regulate  payment  of  wages, 
mines-regulation  acts,  factory  and  workshops  acts  interfering  at 
every  point  with  the  liberties  of  the  capitalist,  adulteration  acts, 
and  acts  to  compensate  workmen  for  injuries  due  to  their  em- 
ployers' neglect.  The  telegraphs  have  been  acquired  by  the 
State,  and  the  functions  of  the  post-office  have  been  so  enlarged 
that  besides  sending  and  delivering  letters,  it  now  despatches  tele- 
grams and  is  a  common  carrier  and  banker  on  an  enormous  scale. 
The  British  State  has  now  one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand 
persons  in  the  direct  service  of  the  community  in  purely  civil 
employments.  The  municipal  bodies  have  also  extended  their 
functions.  Municipalities  now  own  public  parks  and  'gardens, 
museums  and  picture  galleries,  libraries,  baths,  wash-houses, 
technical  schools,  gas  and  water  works,  cattle  markets,  street 
railways,  concert  halls,  piers,  harbors,  dispensaries,  hospitals,  and 
artisans'  dwellings,  and  in  many  towns,  as,  for  example,  Glasgow 
and  Edinburgh,  the  municipality  is  the  owner  of  a  vast  area 
of  house  property.  By  recent  legislation  the  municipalities  are 
empowered  to  acquire  land  to  be  let  by  them  as  allotments  to 
laborers  and  others.  Moreover,  under  the  British  government, 


Labor  and  Socialism  in   English  Politics         617 

localities  can  provide  for  themselves  farms,  irrigation  works, 
bathing  establishments,  and  can  deal  in  guano,  salt,  opium,  qui- 
nine, etc.  The  State  in  England  at  this  moment  provides  for 
every  one  needing  them,  midwifery,  nursery,  education,  board 
and  lodging,  vaccination,  medicine,  public  worship,  amusements, 
burials,  and  carriage  of  money  and  goods.  All  this,  of  course, 
means  that  the  State,  either  in  its  national  or  municipal  capacity, 
has  been  gradually  absorbing  what  were  private  functions,  and 
this  under  a  restricted  suffrage  and  despite  the  immense  dead- 
weight of  individualism  left  behind  by  the  Cobden  School.  Eng- 
land is  indeed  leaving  the  days  of  laisser  jaire  far  behind.  .  .  . 

§  6.   Origin  of  the  Socialist  Movement 

The  socialist  movement  in  England  is  now  (1888)  about  eight 
years  old.  In  1880  was  founded  a  small  body  called  the  "Demo- 
cratic Federation"  which,  in  1883,  prefixed  the  word  social  to 
its  title  and  became  an  avowedly  socialist  body.  At  the  end  of 
1884  it  experienced  the  inevitable  fissure  which  sooner  or  later 
splits  all  bodies  of  advanced  reformers  in  twain,  and  the  "Socialist 
League"  arose.  A  little  prior  to  this  a  small  number  of  educated 
socialists  formed  the  Fabian  Society,  which  differed  from  the 
other  two  bodies  in  that  its  members  proposed  to  adopt  the  policy 
of  Quinctus  Fabius,  dictator,  qui  cunctando  restituit  rem.  These 
three  bodies  are  very  small;  it  is  doubtful  if  their  numbers  amount 
to  a  couple  of  thousand  all  told,  but  there  is  no  room  for  doubt 
as  to  t"ie  influence  they  have  exerted  and  are  exerting  on  active 
politicians  and  on  a  section  of  the  workingmen.  While  there  are 
few  definite  socialists  in  England,  there  is  much  unconscious  so- 
cialism, especially  in  London;  and  this  is  due  mainly  to  the  very 
energetic  propaganda  carried  on  in  workmen's  clubs.  Ten  years 
ago  individualistic  secularism  of  a  hard  and  unimaginative  order 
reigned  in  these  places;  to-day  they  are  pervaded  by  a  more  or 
less  socialistic  spirit.  The  change  is  so  striking  that  none  ac- 
quainted with  these  proletarian  institutions  can  fail  to  recognize 
it.  The  working  classes  of  England  are  not  nearly  so  intelligent 
or  impulsive  as  those  of  France,  and  therefore  what  socialism 
there  is,  is  vaguer  in  England  than  in  France  and  does  not  prompt 
to  such  decisive  and  logical  action.  But  it  is  there,  and  it  is  be- 
ginning to  affect  the  skilled  workmen. 


618  English  Historians 


§  7.  Political  Tendencies  of  Trades  Unionism 

Though  the  trades  unions  are  on  the  whole  somewhat  conserva- 
tive, it  is  noteworthy  that  for  the  last  five  years  the  address  from 
the  chair  at  the  annual  congress  has  been  of  a  more  or  less  social- 
istic character,  while  the  active  socialistic  campaign  is  largely 
carried  on  by  skilled  workmen,  such  as  engineers  and  compositors. 
At  the  congress  held  this  year  (1888)  at  Bradford,  a  resolution  was 
carried  by  an  overwhelming  majority  in  favor  of  the  nationaliza- 
tion of  land;  another  resolution  demanded  direct  labor  represen- 
tation in  Parliament;  while  a  resolution  favoring  an  eight  hours' 
working  day  would  have  been  carried  had  it  not  been  for  certain 
complications  into  which  it  is  impossible  to  enter  here.  Thus  we 
see  that  the  socialistic  principle  as  against  the  let-alone  principle 
is  making  way  rapidly  among  English  skilled  workers.  That  this 
is  in  large  measure  due  to  the  socialist  propaganda  may  be  in- 
ferred from  the  fact  that  it  follows  almost  immediately  upon  the 
formation  of  an  avowed  socialist  organization  in  England.  This 
is  really  a  case  of  post  hoc,  ergo  propter  hoc.  In  England  the  func- 
tion of  revolutionary  socialism  seems  to  be  similar  to  the  func- 
tion of  unitarianism  in  religion;  it  has  few  positive  adherents,  but 
it  leavens  very  powerfully  the  political  thought  around  it. 

§  8.   Tendency  of  Parliamentary  Legislation 

More  important,  however,  than  the  resolutions  of  trades  union 
congresses  is  the  actual  legislation  which  Parliament  is  com- 
pelled to  take  up.  There  is  scarcely  an  eminent  politician  in 
either  house  of  Parliament  who  does  not  dilate  to  his  audience  on 
the  virtues  of  self-help ;  but  the  same  men  when  they  come  to  deal 
with  the  legislative  problems  actually  before  them,  are  con- 
stantly calling  into  being  new  state  powers,  are  constantly  extend- 
ing state  functions,  are  perpetually  interfering  with  freedom  of 
contract,  are  forever  directing  the  hands  of  the  legislative  Briareus 
towards  the  multitudinous  industries  and  enterprises  which,  half  a 
century  ago,  were  left  to  regulate  themselves.  Such  a  chronic 
state  of  legislative  activity  perpetually  increasing,  is  surely  no 
accident.  It  points  to  an  ever  growing  collective  control  over  the 
industrial  life  of  the  community. 

But  further,  there  are  problems  before  England  which  arc 
likely  to  be  solved  in  a  socialistic  sejise,  and  thus  to  hasten  the 


Labor  and  Socialism  in  English  Politics        619 

socialistic  development  of  the  country.  These  are  specially  four: 
(i)  Large  tracts  of  land  going  out  of  cultivation  and  the  conse- 
quent perpetual  decline  in  agricultural  rent;  (2)  the  rehousing 
of  the  great  mass  of  the  unskilled  working  classes;  (3)  the 
revelations  as  to  the  sweating  system  recently  made  before  the 
special  committee  of  the  House  of  Lords;  and  (4)  the  question 
of  the  permanently  unemployed.  It  is  difficult  to  see  how  these 
questions  are  to  be  solved  on  individualistic  lines.  Even  that 
optimist  statistician,  Mr.  Giffen,  after  attempting  to  prove  that 
the  people  are  better  off  than  they  ever  were,  expresses  his  convic- 
tion that  "something  like  a  revolution"  in  the  condition  of  the 
people  is  desirable.  But  such  a  revolution  can  be  brought  about 
only  by  the  State,  i.e.  by  the  people  in  their  corporate  capacity. 
Individual  effort  cannot  rebuild  East  London  and  house  a  million 
working  people  as  they  ought  to  be  housed.  Individual  effort 
cannot  prevent  overtime  work  in  government  establishments, 
on  railways,  in  street  cars,  and  omnibuses,  and  so  give  occupa- 
tion to  the  unemployed.  Individual  effort  cannot  take  hold  of 
and  cultivate  the  land  of  England,  nor  can  it  prevent  the  ground 
landlord  from  absorbing  his  "unearned  increment"  out  of  the 
industry  and  enterprise  of  the  people.  It  is  perfectly  obvious  that 
all  these  problems  will  demand  the  aid  of  the  State  in  their  solution, 
and  it  is  equally  obvious  that  such  state  action  will  bring  society 
a  very  long  way  on  in  the  socialist  direction. 

§  9.   Tendency  of  Political  Programmes 

And  now  let  us  look  for  a  moment  to  the  attitude  of  the  political 
parties  with  regard  to  the  social  problem  and  to  their  probable 
respective  programmes,  and  we  shall  see,  I  think,  that  both  parties, 
while  repudiating  socialism,  yet  advocate  such  measures  as  will 
lead  on  to  socialism  and  can  be  logically  defended  on  something 
like  socialistic  grounds.  The  Conservative  party  will  rely  in  the 
main  on  schemes  of  state-assisted  immigration,  on  protection,  on  the 
exclusion  of  foreign  labor,  and  probably  on  some  compulsory 
insurance  scheme  borrowed  from  the  Bismarckian  system.  Al- 
though the  Conservative  leaders  fight  shy  of  protection,  nearly 
every  one  of  their  followers  is  a  protectionist  at  heart ;  and  the  recent 
sugar  bounties  convention  is  a  sign  that  even  the  timid  leaders  of 
the  party  will  go  some  way  to  gratify  their  followers.  To  the 
exclusion  of  foreign  labor  nearly  every  Conservative  candidate  in 
London  and  the  large  towns  will  be  committed  at  the  next  election. 


620  English  Historians 

As  for  the  immigration  scheme,  the  people  do  not  take  very  kindly 
to  it,  and  all  acute  politicians  will  be  careful  not  to  commit  them- 
selves too  far  in  that  direction,  and  the  same  may  be  said  of  any 
state  insurance  scheme.  But  to  these  things  in  some  form,  the 
majority  of  Conservatives  will  adhere.  And  be  it  observed  that 
each  and  all  of  these  schemes  involved  collective  action  for  the 
supposed  benefit  of  the  people.  The  State  will  do  something  that 
the  masses  may  have  work  to  do  and  bread  to  eat.  In  other  words, 
it  is  the  collective,  the  socialist,  not  the  individualist,  method  which 
Conservatism  will  adopt. 

Much  more  decidedly  socialistic  will  be  the  radical  programme. 
Radicals  will  not  send  the  people  out  of  the  country  at  the  public 
expense,  but  will  supply  public  money  to  settle  them  on  the  land. 
They  will  propose  to  tax  ground  rents  and  mineral  royalties  with 
a  view  to  their  absorption  by  the  community.  They  will  munici- 
palize land  and  nationalize  railways.  As  soon  as  the  organized 
working-class  vote  demands  it,  they  will  shorten  the  hours  of  labor 
and  interfere  further  with  the  capitalist  in  the  working  of  his  busi- 
ness. And  it  is  probable  that,  under  the  new  and  almost  revo- 
lutionary extension  of  local  self-government,  they  will  start  public 
works  for  the  relief  of  the  unemployed.  It  need  not  be  pointed 
out  that  every  one  of  these  measures  would  involve  a  vast  increase 
of  collective  authority  and  would  be  an  immense  step  in  the  social- 
ist direction. 

The  conclusion,  then,  to  which  the  logic  of  facts  drives  any  com- 
petent and  well-informed  investigator  into  English  affairs  is  that 
in  no  country,  probably,  is  progress  being  made  more  rapidly  and 
more  certainly  in  the  socialist  direction.  When  one  compares  the 
labor  legislation  of  Great  Britain,  passed  even  under  middle-class 
rule,  with  that  of  France  or  Belgium,  one  feels  that  the  former  coun- 
try is  in  these  matters  half  a  century  ahead  of  the  two  latter.  It  is 
so  because  the  industrial  development  of  England  is  half  a  cen- 
tury ahead  of  that  of  either  France  or  Belgium,  and  the  great  lesson 
of  politics  is  that  legislation  is  determined  by  the  social  and  eco- 
nomic conditions  of  the  time.  The  economic  development  of 
Great  Britain  is  further  advanced  than  that  of  any  other  country, 
and  therefore  it  is  that  Great  Britain  leads  the  world  in  socialist 
legislation.  And  if  it  be  not  a  paradox  to  say  so,  it  is  that  very 
socialistic  legislation  which  prevents  in  England  the  wilder  devel- 
opments of  revolutionary  socialism  with  which  the  world  is  familiar 
in  the  case  of  France  and  Germany.  It  is  rather  the  orderly  evo- 
lutionary socialism  of  Rodbertus  than  the  more  revolutionary 


Labor  and  Socialism  in   English   Politics        621 

socialism  of  Marx  (identical  as  the  doctrines  of  each  may  be  at 
the  bottom)  which  has  a  fair  prospect  of  development  in  England. 

§  10.   Socialism  and  Local  Autonomy 

One  other  matter  needs  to  be  dwelt  upon.  Englishmen  arc 
rightly  supposed  all  the  world  over  to  be  devoted  to  individual 
liberty,  and  the  superficial  student  of  socialism  supposes  that  under 
it  all  individual  liberty  is  lost  and  that  every  one  is  merely  the  agent 
of  a  huge  central  bureau.  If  this  were  the  only  kind  of  socialism 
possible,  it  might  be  freely  admitted  that  it  would  have  no  chance 
in  England.  But  he  is  blind  to  signs  of  the  times  who  does  not 
perceive  that  a  vast  movement  of  decentralization  is  going  on  in 
England.  The  Irish  demand  for  home  rule,  the  cries  from  Scot- 
land and  Wales  for  some  reasonable  autonomy,  the  concessions 
made  even  by  a  Conservative  ministry  in  the  local  government  bill, 
and  the  certain  extension  of  that  measure  which  the  next  Radical 
government  will  make  —  all  these  are  indications  that  Great 
Britain  is  being  prepared  for  a  kind  of  socialism  wholly  different 
from  the  authoritative  centralizing  methods  of  Marx,  socialism 
consistent  with  and  in  fact  dependent  on  an  energetic  local  life  and 
compatible  with  all  kinds  of  local  form  and  coloring.  If,  for 
example,  the  land  in  England  is  made  public  property,  it  will  not 
be  through  a  great  central  rent-receiving  machine  at  Whitehall, 
but  rather  through  the  localities,  each  of  which  will  be  as  free 
as  is  consistent  with  the  union  of  the  whole.  Some  kind  of  cen- 
tralizirg  there  must  indeed  be;  some  kind  of  uniformity  is  insepa- 
rable from  the  modern  industrial  system  so  far  as  one  can  see. 
And  there  is  no  greater  monotony  or  uniformity  or  absence  of 
individual  free  play  than  in  the  modern  factories  with  which 
industrial  England  is  crowded.  It  may  well  be  indeed  that  under 
some  rational  socialistic  system  individual  liberty  may  actually 
extend  in  various  important  directions,  even  if  it  should  be  con- 
tracted in  others. 

The  immediate  political  future  is  exceedingly  problematical. 
It  is  a  period  of  chaos  and  bewilderment.  The  old  parties  are 
undergoing  vast  changes,  fundamental  questions  are  being  asked, 
and  probably  the  next  few  years  will  exhibit  rapid,  shifting  scenes 
of  a  kaleidoscopic  character.  During  this  time  of  change  the  labor 
party  will,  unless  I  am  greatly  mistaken,  take  form  and  develop 
itself,  make  and  unmake  ministries,  and  gradually  acquire  more 
and  more  control  over  the  springs  of  government  and  the  sources 


622  English  Historians 

of  national  power.  The  politicians  will  bid  for  the  labor  vote 
as  they  have  bid  for  the  Irish  vote ;  indeed,  it  is  the  startling  suc- 
cess of  Mr.  Parnell  which  has  so  profoundly  influenced  the  leading 
workers  and  thinkers  in  the  labor  ranks.  Mr.  Parnell  has  made 
Parnellites  of  the  Liberal  party;  we  shall  see  the  leaders  of  both 
parties  before  long  anxious  to  do  whatever  the  labor  leaders  may 
require. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Webb,  Industrial  Democracy,  Introduction  to  the  1002  edition ;  History 
oj  Trade  Unionism;  Problems  oj  Modern  Industry;  Socialism  in  England. 
Gammage,  History  oj  the  Chartist  Movement.  Ensor,  Modern  Socialism, 
especially  valuable  for  the  programmes  of  the  various  English  labor  parties 
and  leaders.  Mackay  (editor),  A  Plea  for  Liberty,  a  protest  and  argument 
against  state  interference.  Porritt,  Party  Conditions  in  England,  in  the 
Political  Science  Quarterly,  June,  1906. 


PART  IX 

THE    EMPIRE   IN  THE   NINETEENTH   CENTURY 
CHAPTER  I 

THE  ECONOMIC   FOUNDATIONS   OF  IMPERIALISM 

IN  every  European  country  domestic  politics  is  complicated 
by  questions  involved  in  securing  new  markets  for  manufactures 
and  new  areas  for  the  profitable  investment  of  capital.  Though 
these  great  motives  are  supplemented  by  religious  sentiments  and 
by  philosophic  conceptions  concerning  the  world's  civilization, 
they  are  without  doubt  the  great  impelling  forces  in  what  is  called 
"imperialism."  The  problem  of  how  far  domestic  prosperity 
and  true  civilization  are  connected  with  the  free  outlet  of  these 
forces,  and  the  military  and  naval  support  of  mercantile  operations, 
is  one  of  the  gravest  and  most  important  that  has  ever  confronted 
Westein  nations.  In  Great  Britain  the  opinion  of  statesmen  and 
publicists  has  passed  through  many  phases.  For  a  time  during  the 
middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  many  of  the  leading  thinkers 
were  dominated  by  a  belief  that  colonies  would  in  time  become  in- 
dependent States,  and  that  additional  imperial  complications  should 
not  be  undertaken.  Since  1870,  however,  under  the  steady  press- 
ure of  the  forces  mentioned  above,  the  borders  of  the  British  em- 
pire have  been  steadily  advanced,  and  there  has  been  a  strongly 
growing  sentiment  that  the  empire  should  be  bound  more  and  more 
closely  together  and  that  opportunities  for  new  additions  should 
not  be  allowed  to  escape.  A  very  thorough  analysis  of  the  inner 
character  of  imperialism  and  its  many  problems  is  to  be  found  in 
Mr.  Hobson's  Imperialism:  a  Study.  It  is  not  without  its  con- 

623 


624  English  Historians 

troversial  aspects,  but  it  is  one  of  the  most  stimulating  books  of 
our  time  on  this  very  important  subject. 

§  i.    The  Economic  Argument  for  Imperialism1 

No  mere  array  of  facts  and  figures  adduced  to  illustrate  the  eco- 
nomic nature  of  the  new  imperialism  will  suffice  to  dispel  the  popu- 
lar delusion  that  the  use  of  national  force  to  secure  new  markets 
by  annexing  fresh  tracts  of  territory  is  a  sound  and  necessary  pol- 
icy for  an  advanced  industrial  country  like  Great  Britain.  It  has 
indeed  been  proved  that  recent  annexations  of  tropical  countries, 
procured  at  great  expense,  have  furnished  poor  and  precarious 
markets ;  that  our  aggregate  trade  with  our  colonial  possessions  is 
'  virtually  stationary ;  and  that  our  most  profitable  and  progressive 
trade  is  with  rival  industrial  nations,  whose  territories  we  have 
no  desire  to  annex,  whose  markets  we  cannot  force,  and  whose 
active  antagonism  we  are  provoking  by  our  expansive  policy. 

But  these  arguments  are  not  conclusive.    It  is  open  to  imperial- 
\f\ists  to  argue  thus:    "We  must  have  markets  for  our  growing 
I  \  manufactures ;  we  must  have  new  outlets  for  the  investment  of  our 
\  'surplus  capital  and  for  the  energies  of  the  adventurous  surplus  of 
k  \   our  population :   such  expansion  is  a  necessity  of  life  to  a  nation 
with  our  great  and  growing  powers  of  production.     An  ever  larger 
share  of  our  population  is  devoted  to  the  manufactures  and  com- 
merce of  towns,  and  is  thus  dependent  for  life  and  work  upon  food 
and  raw  materials  from  foreign  lands.     In  order  to  buy  and  pay  for 
these  things  we  must  sell  our  goods  abroad.     During  the  first 
three-quarters  of  the  century  we  could  do  so  without  difficulty  by 
a  natural  expansion  of  commerce  with  continental  nations  and 
our  colonies,  all  of  which  were  far  behind  us  in  the  main  arts  of 
manufacture  and  the  carrying  trades.     So  long  as  England  held  a 
virtual  monopoly  of  the  world  markets  for  certain  important  classes 
1     of  manufactured  goods,  imperialism  was  unnecessary.      Durji 
\     the  Instthirty  yppix  thii  mnnnfnrturinjr  nnd  trading  supremacy 
'    has  been  greatly  impaired;    other  nations,  especially  GernTa"ny, 
the  TTnTT"'l  r!  .it       mi  1  Rpl^inpi,  have  advanced  with  great  rapidity, 
and  while  they  have  not  crushed  or  evefl^aLmxi  the  increase  ofour 
extefhajtrade,  their  competition  is^  making  if  more  and  more  difti- 
cult  to  dispose  of  the  full  surplus  of  our  manutactlim  at  ft-pfofit. 


1  Hohson,  Imperialism:  a  Study,  chap.  vi.     By  permission  of  ].  A.  Hob- 
son,  Esq.,  and  James  Pott  &  Company,  Publishers. 


The  Economic   Foundations  of  Imperialism      625 


The  encroachments  made  by  these  nations  upon  our  old  markets, 
even  in  our  own  possessions,  make  it  most  urgent  that  we  should  i 
take  energetic  means  to  secure  new  markets.  These  new  mar-j 
kets  must  lie  in  hitherto  undeveloped  countries^ 
tropics^^hej^-.yagtlg^ulajlojiOi^e  dTpabte^tif  giuwing-eeqmmid 
needs  which  6ui^ng^factin'ers-^4uLjnerch^^ Our 
rivals  are  selzlrig~and  annexing  territoriesfor  slmilarpnrposes,  and 
when  they  have  annexed  them,  close  them  to  our  trade.  The  di- 
plomacy and  the  arms  of  Great  Britain  must  be  used  in  oreterTo 
>  ' 


perience^shows  that  the  safest  means  oFsecunng  and  "developing 

such  markets  is 

TheTpresen 


valueof  these  markets  must  not  be  taken  as  a  final 
test  of  the  economy  of  such  a  policy;    the  process  of  educating 
civilized  needs  which  we  can  supply  is  of  necessity  a  gradual  one, 
and  the  cost  of  such  imperialism  must  be  regarded  as  a  capital 
outlay,  the  fruits  of  which  posterity  will  reap.      The  new  market*v/j 
may  not  be  large,  but  they  form  serviceable  outlets  for  the  ov6rrj  / 
flow  of  our  great  textile  and  metal  industries,  and  when  the  vasA  / 
Asiatic  and  African  populations  of  the  interior  are  reached,  av 
rapid  expansion  of  trade  may  be  expected  to  result. 

"Far  larger  and  more  important  is  the  pressure  of  capital  for  (. 
external  fields  of  investment.     Moreover,  while  the  manufacturer 
and  trader  are  well  content  to  trade  with  foreign  nations,  the  ten-   , 
dency  for  investors  to  work  towards  the  political  annexation  of  coun- 
tries which  contain  their  more  speculative  investments  is  very  i 
powerful.     Of  the  fact  of  this  pressure  of  capital  there  can  be  no 
question.      Large  savings  are  made  which  cannot  find  any  profit- 
able investment  in  this  country;   they  must  find  employment  else- 
where, and  it  is  to  the  advantage  of  the  nation  that  they  should  be 
employed  as  largely  as  possible  in  lands  where  they  can  be  util- 
ized in  opening  up  markets  for  British  trade  and  employment  for 
British  enterprise. 

"However   costly,  however   perilous,  this   process   of   imperial 
expansion  may  be,  it  is  necessary  to  the  continued  existence  and  / 
progress  of  our  nation;   if  we  abandon  it,  we  must  be  content  toM  > 
leave  the  development  of  the  world  to  other  nations,  who  will  , 
everywhere  cut  into  our  trade,  and  even  impair  our  means  of  ' 
securing  the  food  and  raw  materials  we  require  to  support  our' 
population.     Imperialism  is  thus  seen  to  be,  not  a  choice,  but  a 
necessity." 


2S 


626  English  Historians 


§  2.   Economic  Forces  in  American  Imperialism 

The  practical  force  of  this  economic  argument  in  politics  is 
strikingly  illustrated  by  the  recent  history  of  the  United  States. 
Here  is  a  country  which  suddenly  breaks  through  a  Conservative 
policy,  strongly  held  by  both  political  parties,  bound  up  with  every 
popular  instinct  and  tradition,  and  flings  itself  into  a  rapid  im- 
perial career  for  which  it  possesses  neither  the  material  nor  the 
moral  equipment,  risking  the  principles  and  practices  of  liberty 
and  equality  by  the  establishment  of  militarism  and  the  forcible 
subjugation  of  peoples  which  it  cannot  safely  admit  to  the  condi- 
tion of  American  citizenship. 

Is  this  a  mere  wild  freak  of  spread-eaglism,  a  burst  of  political 
ambition  on  the  part  of  a  nation  coming  to  a  sudden  realization 
of  its  destiny  ?  Not  at  all.  The  spirit  of  adventure,  the  American 
"mission  of  civilization,"  are,  as  forces  making  for  imperialism, 
clearly  subordinate  to  the  driving  force  of  the  economic  factor. 
The  dramatic  character  of  the  change  is  due  to  the  unprecedented 
rapidity  of  the  industrial  revolution  in  the  United  States  during 
the  last  two  decades.  During  that  period  the  United  States,  with 
her  unrivalled  natural  resources,  her  immense  resources  of  skilled 
and  unskilled  labor,  and  her  genius  for  invention  and  organization, 
has  developed  the  best-equipped  and  most  productive  manufac- 
turing economy  the  world,  has  yet  seen.  Fostered  by  rigid  pro- 
tective tariffs,  her  metal,  textile,  tool,  clothing,  furniture,  and  other 
manufactures  have  shot  up  in  a  single  generation  from  infancy  to 
full  maturity,  and,  having  passed  through  a  period  of  intense  com- 
petition, are  attaining,  under  the  able  control  of  great  trust-makers, 
a  power  of  production  greater  than  has  been  attained  in  the  most 
advanced  industrial  countries  of  Europe. 

An  era  of  cut-throat  competition,  followed  by  a  rapid  process 
of  amalgamation,  has  thrown  an  enormous  quantity  of  wealth  into 
the  hands  of  a  small  number  of  captains  of  industry.  No  luxury 
of  living  to  which  this  class  could  attain  kept  pace  with  its  rise  of 
income,  and  a  process  of  automatic  saving  set  in  upon  an  un- 
precedented scale.  The  investment  of  these  savings  in  other  indus- 
tries helped  to  bring  these  under  the  same  concentrative  forces. 
Thus  a  great  increase  of  savings  seeking  profitable  investment  is 
synchronous  with  a  stricter  economy  of  the  use  of  existing  capital. 
No  doubt  the  rapid  growth  of  a  population,  accustomed  to  a  high 
and  an  always  ascending  standard  of  comfort,  absorbs  in  the 


The  Economic  Foundations  of  Imperialism       627 

satisfaction  of  its  wants  a  large  quantity  of  new  capital.  But  the 
actual  rate  of  saving,  conjoined  with  a  more  economical  applica- 
tion of  forms  of  existing  capital,  has  exceeded  considerably  the 
rise  of  the  national  consumption  of  manufactures.  The  power 
of  production  has  far  outstripped  the  actual  rate  of  consump- 
tion, and,  contrary  to  the  older  economic  theory,  has  been  unable 
to  force  a  corresponding  increase  of  consumption  by  lowering 
prices. 

This  is  no  mere  theory.  The  history  of  any  of  the  numerous 
trusts  or  combinations  in  the  United  States  sets  out  the  facts  with 
complete  distinctness.  .  .  . 

American  manufactures  are  saturated  with  capital  and  can 
absorb  no  more.  One  after  another  they  are  seeking  refuge  from 
the  waste  of  competition  in  "combines"  which  secure  a  measure 
of  profitable  peace  by  restricting  the  quantity  of  operative  capital. 
Industrial  and  financial  princes  in  oil,  sugar,  steel,  railroads, 
banking,  etc.,  are  faced  with  the  dilemma  of  either  spending  more 
than  they  know  how  to  spend,  or  forcing  markets  outside  the  home 
area.  Two  economic  courses  are  open  to  them,  both  leading 
towards  an  abandonment  of  the  political  isolation  of  the  past  and 
the  adoption  of  imperialist  methods  in  the  future.  Instead  of 
shutting  down  inferior  mills  and  rigidly  restricting  output  to  cor- 
respond with  profitable  sales  in  the  home  markets,  they  may  employ 
their  full  productive  power,  applying  their  savings  to  increase  their 
business  capital,  and,  while  still  regulating  output  and  prices  for 
the  home  market,  may  "hustle"  for  foreign  markets,  dumping 
down  their  surplus  goods  at  prices  which  would  not  be  possible 
save  for  the  profitable  nature  of  their  home  market.  So  likewise 
they  may  employ  their  savings  in  seeking  investments  outside  their 
country,  first  repaying  the  capital  borrowed  from  Great  Britain 
and  other  countries  for  the  early  development  of  their  railroads, 
mines,  and  manufactures,  and  afterwards  themselves  becoming  a 
creditor  class  to  foreign  countries. 

It  is  this  sudden  demand  for  foreign  markets  for  manufactures 
and  for  investments  which  is  avowedly  responsible  for  the  adop- 
tion of  imperialism  as  a  political  policy  and  practice  by  the  Re- 
publican party  to  which  the  great  industrial  and  financial  chiefs 
belong,  and  which  belongs  to  them.  The  adventurous  enthusi- 
asm of  President  Roosevelt  and  his  "manifest  destiny"  and 
"mission  of  civilization"  party  must  not  deceive  us.  It  is  Messrs. 
Rockefeller,  Pierpont  Morgan,  Hanna,  Schwab,  and  their  asso- 
ciates who  need  imperialism  and  who  are  fastening  it  upon  the 


628  English  Historians 

shoulders  of  the  great  republic  of  the  West.  They  need  imperial- 
ism because  they  desire  to  use  the  public  resources  of  their  country 
to  find  profitable  employment  for  the  capital  which  otherwise 
would  be  superfluous. 

It  is  not  indeed  necessary  to  own  a  country  in  order  to  do  trade 
with  it  or  to  invest  capital  in  it,  and  doubtless  the  United  States 
can  find  some  vent  for  their  surplus  goods  and  capital  in  European 
countries.  But  these  countries  are  for  the  most  part  able  to  make 
provision  for  themselves ;  most  of  them  have  erected  tariffs  against 
manufacturing  imports,  and  even  Great  Britain  is  being  urged 
to  defend  herself  by  reverting  to  protection.  The  big  American 
manufacturers  and  financiers  will  be  compelled  to  look  to  China 
and  the  Pacific  and  to  South  America  for  their  most  profitable 
chances;  protectionists  by  principle  and  practice,  they  will  insist 
upon  getting  as  close  a  monopoly  of  these  markets  as  they  can  se- 
cure, and  the  competition  of  Germany,  England,  and  other  trad- 
ing nations  will  drive  them  to  the  establishment  of  special  political 
relations  with  the  markets  they  most  prize.  Cuba,  the  Philip- 
pines, and  Hawaii  are  but  the  hors  d'ceuvre  to  whet  an  appetite 
for  an  ampler  banquet.  Moreover,  the  powerful  hold  upon  poli- 
tics, which  these  industrial  and  financial  magnates  possess,  forms  a 
separate  stimulus,  which,  as  we  have  shown,  is  operative  in  Great 
Britain  and  elsewhere;  the  public  expenditure  in  pursuit  of  an 
imperial  career  will  be  a  separate  immense  source  of  profit  to 
these  men,  as  financiers  negotiating  loans,  shipbuilders  and  owners 
handling  subsidies,  contractors  and  manufacturers  of  armaments, 
and  other  imperial  appliances. 

§  3.  Economic  Forces  in  European  Imperialism 

The  same  needs  for  markets  and  opportunities  of  investment 
exist  in  European  countries,  and,  as  is  admitted,  drive  govern- 
ments along  the  same  path.  Over-production  in  the  sense  of  an 
excessive  manufacturing  plant,  and  surplus  capital  which  cannot 

id  sound  investments  within  the  country,  force  Great  Britain, 

xermany,  Holland,  and  France,  to  place  larger  and  larger  portions 
/f  \their  economic  resources  outside  the  area  of  their  present 

jlftical  domain,  and  then  stimulate  a  policy  of  political  ex- 
pansion so  as  to  take  in  the  new  areas.  The  economic  sources 
of  this  movement  are  laid  bare  by  periodic  trade-depressions  due 
to  an  inability  of  producers  to  find  adequate  and  profitable  markets 
for  what  they  can  produce.  The  majority  report  of  the  commis- 


The  Economic  Foundations  of  Imperialism      629 

sion  upon  the  depression  of  trade  in  1885  Put  the  matter  in  a  nut- 
shell: "That,  owing  to  the  nature  of  the  times,  the  demand  for 
our  commodities  does  not  increase  at  the  same  rate  as  formerly; 
that  our  capacity  for  production  is  consequently  in  excess  of  our 
requirements,  and  could  be  considerably  increased  at  short  notice ; 
that  this  is  due  partly  to  the  competition  of  the  capital  which  is 
being  steadily  accumulated  in  the  country."  The  minority  report 
straightly  imputes  the  condition  of  affairs  to  "over-production." 
Germany  is  at  the  present  suffering  severely  from  what  it  called 
a  glut  of  capital  and  of  manufacturing  power;  she  must  have  new 
markets;  her  consuls  all  over  the  world  are  "hustling"  for  trade; 
trading  settlements  are  forced  upon  Asia  Minor ;  in  East  and  West 
Africa,  in  China,  and  elsewhere  the  German  empire  is  impelled 
to  a  policy  of  colonization  and  protectorates  as  outlets  for  German 
commercial  energy. 

Every  improvement  of  methods  of  production,  every  concentra- 
tion of  ownership  and  control,  seems  to  accentuate  the  tendency. 
As  one  nation  after  another  enters  the  machine  economy  and 
adopts  advanced  industrial  methods,  it  becomes  more  difficult 
for  its  manufacturers,  merchants,  and  financiers  to  dispose  profit- 
ably of  their  economic  resources,  and  they  are  tempted  more  and 
more  to  use  their  governments  in  order  to  secure  for  their  particu- 
lar use  some  distant  undeveloped  country  by  annexation  and  pro- 
tection. 

The  process,  we  may  be  told,  is  inevitable,  and  so  it  seems  upon 
a  superficial  inspection.  Everywhere  appear  excessive  powers  of 
production,  excessive  capital  in  search  of  investment.  It  is  ad- 
mitted L  y  all  business  men  that  the  growth  of  the  powers  of  produc- 
tion in  their  country  exceeds  the  growth  in  consumption,  that  more 
goods  can  be  produced  than  can  be  sold  at  a  profit,  and  that  more 
capital  exists  than  can  find  remunerative  investment. 

It  is  this  economic  condition  of  affairs  that  forms  the  taproot 
of  imperialism.  If  the  consuming  public  in  this  country  raised 
its  standard  of  consumption  to  keep  pace  with  every  rise  of  pro- 
ductive powers,  there  could  be  no  excess  of  goods  or  capital  clam- 
orous to  use  imperialism  in  order  to  find  markets;  foreign  trade 
would  indeed  exist,  but  there  would  be  no  difficulty  in  exchanging 
a  small  surplus  of  our  manufactures  for  the  food  and  raw  material 
we  annually  absorbed,  and  all  the  savings  that  we  made  could  find 
employment,  if  we  chose,  in  home  industries. 

There  is  nothing  inherently  irrational  in  such  a  supposition. 
Whatever  is  or  can  be  produced,  can  be  consumed,  for  a  claim 


630  English  Historians 

upon  it,  as  rent,  profit,  or  wages,  forms  part  of  the  real  income  of 
some  member  of  the  community,  and  he  can  consume  it,  or  else 
exchange  it  for  some  other  consumable  with  some  one  else  who  will 
consume  it.  With  everything  that  is  produced  a  consuming  power 
is  born.  If,  then,  there  are  goods  which  cannot  get  consumed,  or 
which  cannot  even  get  produced  because  it  is  evident  they  cannot 
get  consumed,  and  if  there  is  a  quantity  of  capital  and  labor  which 
cannot  get  full  employment  because  its  products  cannot  get  con- 
sumed, the  only  possible  explanation  of  this  paradox  is  the  refusal 
of  owners  of  consuming  power  to  apply  that  power  in  effective 
demand  for  commodities. 

It  is,  of  course,  possible  that  an  excess  of  producing  power  might 
exist  in  particular  industries  by  misdirection,  being  engaged  in 
certain  manufactures,  whereas  it  ought  to  have  been  engaged  in 
agriculture  or  some  other  use.  But  no  one  can  seriously  contend 
that  such  misdirection  explains  the  recurrent  gluts  and  consequent 
depressions  of  modern  industry,  or  that,  when  over-production  is 
manifest  in  the  leading  manufactures,  ample  avenues  are  open 
for  the  surplus  capital  and  labor  in  other  industries.  The  general 
character  of  the  excess  of  producing  power  is  proved  by  the  exist- 
ence at  such  times  of  large  bank  stocks  of  idle  money  seeking  any 
sort  of  profitable  investment  and  finding  none. 

§  4.    An  Analysis  of  Over-production  as  the  Basis  of  Imperialism 

The  root  questions  underlying  the  phenomena  are  clearly  these : 
"Why  is  it  that  consumption  fails  to  keep  pace  automatically  in 
a  community  with  power  of  production?"  "Why  does  under- 
consumption or  over-saving  occur?"  For  it  is  evident  that  the 
consuming  power  which,  if  exercised,  would  keep  tense  the  reins 
of  production,  is  in  part  withheld,  or  in  other  words  is  "saved" 
and  stored  up  for  investment.  All  saving  for  investment  does  not 
imply  slackness  of  production;  quite  the  contrary.  Saving  is 
economically  justified,  from  the  social  standpoint,  when  the  capi- 
tal in  which  it  takes  material  shape  finds  full  employment  in  help- 
ing to  produce  commodities  which,  when  produced,  will  be  con- 
sumed. It  is  saving  in  excess  of  this  amount  that  causes  mischief, 
taking  shape  in  surplus  capital  which  is  not  needed  to  assist  cur- 
rent consumption,  and  which  either  lies  idle,  or  tries  to  oust  exist- 
ing capital  from  its  employment,  or  else  seeks  speculative  use 
abroad  under  the  protection  of  the  government. 

But  it  may  be  asked:  "Why  should  there  be  any  tendency  to 


The  Economic  Foundations  of  Imperialism      631 

over-saving  ?  Why  should  the  owners  of  consuming  power  with- 
hold a  larger  quantity  for  savings  than  can  be  serviceably  em- 
ployed?" Another  way  of  putting  the  same  question  is  this: 
"Why  should  not  the  pressure  of  present  wants  keep  pace  with 
every  possibility  of  satisfying  them?"  The  answer  to  these 
pertinent  questions  carries  us  to  the  broadest  issue  of  the  dis- 
tribution of  wealth.  If  a  tendency  to  distribute  income  or  con- 
suming power  according  to  needs  were  operative,  it  is  evident  that 
consumption  would  rise  with  every  rise  of  producing  power,  for 
human  needs  are  illimitable,  and  there  could  be  no  excess  of  sav- 
ing. But  it  is  quite  otherwise  in  a  state  of  economic  society  where 
distribution  has  no  fixed  relation  to  needs,  but  is  determined  by 
other  conditions  which  assign  to  some  people  a  consuming  power 
vastly  in  excess  of  needs  or  possible  uses,  while  others  are  destitute 
of  consuming  power  enough  to  satisfy  even  the  full  demands  of 
physical  efficiency.  The  following  illustration  may  serve  to  make 
the  issue  clear.  "The  volume  of  production  has  been  constantly 
rising  owing  to  the  development  of  modern  machinery.  There 
are  two  main  channels  to  carry  off  these  products,  —  one  channel 
carrying  off  the  product  destined  to  be  consumed  by  the  workers, 
and  the  other  channel  carrying  off  the  remainder  to  the  rich.  The 
workers'  channel  is  in  rock-bound  banks  that  cannot  enlarge, 
owing  to  the  competitive  wage  system  preventing  wages  rising 
pro  rata  with  increased  efficiency.  Wages  are  based  upon  cost 
of  living,  and  not  upon  efficiency  of  labor.  The  miner  in  the  poor 
mine  gets  the  same  wages  per  day  as  the  miner  in  the  adjoining 
rich  mine.  The  owner  of  the  rich  mine  gets  the  advantage,  not 
his  laborer.  The  channel  which  conveys  the  goods  destined  to 
supply  the  rich  is  itself  divided  into  two  streams.  One  stream 
carries  off  what  the  rich  '  spend '  on  themselves  for  the  necessities 
and  luxuries  of  life.  The  other  is  simply  an  '  overflow '  stream 
carrying  off  their  'savings.'  The  channel  for  spending,  i.e.  the 
amount  wasted  by  the  rich  in  luxuries,  may  broaden  somewhat; 
but  owing  to  the  small  number  of  those  rich  enough  to  indulge 
in  whims  it  can  never  be  greatly  enlarged,  and  at  any  rate  it  bears 
such  a  small  proportion  to  the  other  channel  that  in  no  event  can 
much  hope  of  avoiding  a  flood  of  capital  be  hoped  for  from  this 
division.  The  rich  will  never  be  so  ingenious  as  to  spend  enough 
to  prevent  over-production.  The  great  safety  overflow  channel 
which  has  been  constantly  more  and  more  widened  and  deepened 
to  carry  off  the  ever  increasing  flood  of  new  capital  is  that  division 
of  the  stream  which  carried  the  savings  of  the  rich,  and  this  is  not 


632  English  Historians 

only  suddenly  found  to  be  incapable  of  further  enlargement,  but 
actually  seems  to  be  in  the  process  of  being  dammed  up." 

Though  this  presentation  over-accentuates  the  cleavage  between 
rich  and  poor,  and  over-states  the  weakness  of  the  workers,  it  gives 
forcible  and  sound  expression  to  a  most  important  and  ill-recog- 
nized economic  truth.  The  " overflow"  stream  of  savings  is, 
of  course,  fed  not  exclusively  from  the  surplus  income  of  the 
"  rich  " ;  the  professional  and  industrial  middle  classes,  and  to  some 
slight  extent  the  workers,  contribute.  But  the  "flooding"  is 
distinctly  due  to  the  automatic  saving  of  the  surplus  income  of 
rich  men.  This  is,  of  course,  particularly  true  of  America,  where 
multi-millionaires  rise  quickly  and  find  themselves  in  possession 
of  incomes  far  exceeding  the  demands  of  any  craving  that  is  known 
to  them.  To  make  the  metaphor  complete,  the  overflow  stream 
must  be  represented  as  reentering  the  stream  of  production  and 
seeking  to  empty  there  all  the  "savings"  that  it  carries.  Where 
competition  remains  free,  the  result  is  a  chronic  congestion  of 
productive  power  and  of  production,  forcing  down  home  prices, 
wasting  large  sums  in  advertising  and  pushing  for  orders,  and 
periodically  causing  a  crisis  followed  by  a  collapse,  during  which 
quantities  of  capital  and  labor  lie  unemployed  and  unremunerated. 
The  prime  object  of  the  trust  or  other  combine  is  to  remedy  this 
waste  and  loss  by  substituting  regulation  of  output  for  reckless 
over-production.  In  achieving  this  it  actually  narrows  or  even 
dams  up  the  old  channels  of  investment,  limiting  the  overflow 
stream  to  the  exact  amount  required  to  maintain  the  normal 
current  of  output.  But  this  rigid  limitation  of  trade,  though  re- 
quired, for  the  separate  economy  of  each  trust,  does  not  suit  the 
trustmaker,  who  is  driven  to  compensate  for  strictly  regulated 
industry  at  home  by  cutting  new  foreign  channels  as  outlets  for  his 
productive  power  and  his  excessive  savings.  Thus  we  reach  the 
conclusion  that  imperialism  is  the  endeavor  of  the  great  control- 
lers of  industry  to  broaden  the  channel  for  the  flow  of  their  sur- 
plus wealth  by  seeking  foreign  markets  and  foreign  investments 
to  take  off  the  goods  and  capital  they  cannot  sell  or  use  at  home. 

§  5.   An  Economic  Alternative  to  Imperialism 

The  fallacy  of  the  supposed  inevitability  of  imperial  expansion 
as  a  necessary  outlet  for  progressive  industry  is  now  manifest.  It 
is  not  industrial  progress  that  demands  the  opening  up  of  new 
markets  and  areas  of  investment,  but  mal-distribution  of  consuming 


The  Economic  Foundations  of  Imperialism      633 

I   power  which  prevents  the  absorption  of  commodities  and  capital 
within  the  country.     The  over-saving  which  is  the  economic  root 
•  of  imperialism  is  found  by  analysis  to  consist  of  rents,  monopoly 
' '  profits,  and  other  unearned  or  excessive  elements  of  income,  which, 
not  being  earned  by  labor  of  head  or  hand,  have  no  legitimate 
raison  d'etre.     Having  no  natural  relation  to  effort  of  production,  \ 
they    impel    their    recipients    to    no    corresponding   satisfaction  y 
of    consumption;    they    form    a    surplus    wealth   which,    having  1 
no  place  in  the  normal  economy  of  production  and  consumption,   V 
tends  to  accumulate  as  excessive  savings.     Let  any  turn  in  the    I 
tide  of  politico-economic  forces   divert  from   these   owners  their 
excess  of  income  and  make  it  flow,  either  to  the  workers  in  higher 
wages  or  to  the  community  in  taxes,  so  that  it  will  be  spent  in- 
stead of  being  saved,  —  serving  in  either  of  these  ways  to  swell  the 
tide  of  consumption,  —  there  will  be  no  need  to  fight  for  foreign 
markets  or  foreign  areas  of  investment. 

Many  have  carried  their  analysis  so  far  as  to  realize  the  ab- 
surdity of  spending  half  our  financial  resources  in  fighting  to  secure 
foreign  markets  at  times  when  hungry  mouths,  ill-clad  backs,  ill- 
furnished  houses,  indicate  countless  unsatisfied  material  wants 
among  our  own  population.  If  we  may  take  the  careful  statistics 
of  Mr.  Rowntree  for  our  guide,  we  shall  be  aware  that  more  than 
one-fourth  of  the  population  of  our  towns  is  living  at  a  standard 
which  is  below  bare  physical  efficiency.  If,  by  some  economic 
readjustment,  the  products  which  flow  from  the  surplus  saving  of 
the  rich  to  swell  the  overflow  streams  could  be  diverted  so  as  to 
raise  th?  incomes  and  the  standard  of  consumption  of  this  in- 
efficient fourth,  there  would  be  no  need  for  pushful  imperialism, 
and  the  cause  of  social  reform  would  have  won  its  greatest  victory. 
It  is  not  inherent  in  the  nature  of  things  that  we  should  spend  our 
natural  resources  on  militarism,  war,  and  risky,  unscrupulous 
diplomacy,  in  order  to  find  markets  for  our  goods  and  surplus 
capital.  An  intelligent  progressive  community,  based  upon  sub- 
stantial equality  of  educational  and  economic  opportunities,  will 
raise  its  standard  of  consumption  to  correspond  with  every  in- 
creased power  of  production,  and  can  find  full  employment  for 
an  unlimited  quantity  of  capital  and  labor  within  the  limits  of  the 
country  which  it  occupies.  Where  the  distribution  of  incomes 
is  such  as  to  enable  all  classes  of  the  nation  to  convert  their  felt 
wants  into  an  effective  demand  for  commodities,  there  can  be  no 
over-production,  no  under-employment  of  capital  and  labor,  and 
no  necessity  to  fight  for  foreign  markets. 


634  English  Historians 

The  most  convincing  condemnation  of  the  current  economy 
is  conveyed  in  the  difficulty  which  producers  everywhere  experi- 
ence in  finding  consumers  for  their  products  —  a  fact  attested  by 
the  prodigious  growth  of  classes  of  agents  and  middlemen,  the 
multiplication  of  every  sort  of  advertising,  and  the  general  in- 
crease of  the  distributive  classes.  Under  a  sound  economy  the 
pressure  would  be  reversed;  the  growing  wants  of  progressive 
societies  would  be  a  constant  stimulus  to  the  inventive  and  opera- 
tive energies  of  producers,  and  would  form  a  constant  strain  upon 
the  powers  of  production.  The  simultaneous  excess  of  all  the 
factors  of  production,  attested  by  frequently  recurring  periods  of 
trade-depression,  is  a  most  dramatic  exhibition  of  the  false  econ- 
omy of  distribution.  It  does  not  imply  a  mere  miscalculation  in 
the  application  of  productive  power,  or  a  brief  temporary  excess 
of  that  power;  it  manifests  in  an  acute  form  an  economic  waste 
which  is  chronic  and  general  throughout  the  advanced  industrial 
nations ;  a  waste  contained  in  the  divorcement  of  the  desire  to  con- 
sume and  the  power  to  consume. 

If  the  apportionment  of  income  were  such  as  to  evoke  no  ex- 
cessive saving,  full  constant  employment  for  capital  and  labor  would 
be  furnished  at  home.  This,  of  course,  does  not  imply  that  there 
would  be  no  foreign  trade.  Goods  that  cannot  be  produced  at 
home,  or  produced  as  well  or  as  cheaply,  would  still  be  purchased 
by  ordinary  process  of  international  exchange;  but  here  again  the 
pressure  would  be  the  wholesome  pressure  of  the  consumer  anx- 
ious to  buy  abroad  what  he  could  not  buy  at  home  —  not  the  blind 
eagerness  of  the  producer  to  use  every  force  or  trick  of  trade  or 
politics  to  find  markets  for  his  "surplus"  goods. 

The  struggle  for  markets,  the  greater  eagerness  of  producers 
to  sell  than  of  consumers  to  buy,  is  the  crowning  proof  of  a  false 
^economy  of  distribution.  Imperialism  is  the  fruit  of  this  false 
conomy;  "social  reform"  is  its  remedy.  The  primary  purpose 
^f  "social  reform,"  using  the  term  in  its  economic  signification,  is 
to  raise  the  wholesome  standard  of  private  and  public  consump- 
tion for  a  nation,  so  as  to  enable  the  nation  to  live  up  to  its  highest 
standard  of  production.  Even  those  social  reformers  who  aim 
directly  at  abolishing  or  reducing  some  bad  form  of  consumption, 
as  in  the  temperance  movement,  generally  recognize  the  neces- 
sity of  substituting  some  better  form  of  current  consumption  which 
is  more  educative  and  stimulative  of  other  tastes,  and  will  assist 
to  raise  the  general  standard  of  consumption. 

There  is  no  necessity  to  open  up  new  foreign  markets;  the  home 


The  Economic  Foundations  of  Imperialism      635 

markets  are  capable  of  indefinite  expansion.  Whatever  is  pro- 
duced in  England  can  be  consumed  in  England,  provided  that  th? 
"income,"  or  power  to  demand  commodities,  is  properly  distrib-  \ 
uted.  This  only  appears  untrue  because  of  the  unnatural  and 
unwholesome  specialization  to  which  this  country  has  been  sub- 
jected, based  upon  a  bad  distribution  of  economic  resources, 
which  has  induced  an  overgrowth  of  certain  manufacturing  trades 
for  the  express  purpose  of  effecting  foreign  sales.  If  the  industrial 
revolution  had  taken  place  in  an  England  founded  upon  an  equal 
access  by  all  classes  to  land,  education,  and  legislation,  specializa- 
tion in  manufactures  would  not  have  gone  so  far  (though  more 
intelligent  progress  would  have  been  made,  by  reason  of  a  widen- 
ing of  the  area  of  selection  of  inventive  and  organizing  talents); 
foreign  trade  would  have  been  less  important,  though  more  steady; 
the  standard  of  life  for  all  portions  of  the  population  would  have 
been  high,  and  the  present  rate  of  national  consumption  would 
probably  have  given  full,  constant,  remunerative  employment 
to  a  far  larger  quantity  of  private  and  public  capital  than  is  now 
employed.  For  the  over-saving  or  wider  consumption  that  is 
traced  to  excessive  incomes  of  the  rich  is  a  suicidal  economy,  even 
from  the  exclusive  standpoint  of  capital;  for  consumption  alone 
vitalizes  capital  and  makes  it  capable  of  yielding  profits.  Ar 
economy  that  assigns  to  the  "possessing"  classes  an  excess  of] 
consuming  power  which  they  cannot  use,  and  cannot  convert  into 
really  serviceable  capital,  is  a  dog-in-the-manger  policy.  The  so- 
cial reforms  which  deprive  the  possessing  classes  of  their  surplus 
will  not,  therefore,  inflict  upon  them  the  real  injury  they  dread; 
they  can  only  use  this  surplus  by  forcing  on  their  country  a  wreck- 
ing policy  of  imperialism.  The  only  safety  of  nations  lies  in  re- 
moving the  unearned  increments  of  income  from  the  possessing 
classes,  and  adding  them  to  the  wage  income  of  the  working  classes 
or  to  the  public  income,  in  order  that  they  may  be  spent  in  raising 
the  standard  of  consumption. 

Social  reform  bifurcates,  according  as  reformers  seek  to  achieve 
this  end  by  raising  wages  or  by  increasing  public  taxation  and 
expenditure.  These  courses  are  not  essentially  contradictory, 
but  are  rather  complimentary.  Working-class  movements  aim, 
either  by  private  cooperation  or  by  political  pressure  on  legislative 
and  administrative  government,  at  increasing  the  proportion  of 
the  national  income  which  accrues  to  labor  in  the  form  of  wages, 
pensions,  compensation  for  injuries,  etc.  State  socialism  aims 
at  getting  for  the  direct  use  of  the  whole  society  an  increased  share 


636  English  Historians 

of  the  "social  values,"  which  arise  from  the  closely  and  essentially 
cooperative  work  of  an  industrial  society,  taxing  property  and  in- 
comes so  as  to  draw  into  the  public  exchequer  for  public  expen- 
diture the  "unearned  elements"  of  income,  leaving  to  individual 
producers  those  incomes  which  are  necessary  to  induce  them  to 
apply  in  the  best  way  their  economic  energies,  and  to  private  en- 
terprises those  businesses  which  do  not  breed  monopoly,  and 
which  the  public  need  not  or  cannot  undertake.  These  are  not, 
indeed,  the  sole  or  perhaps  the  best-avowed  objects  of  social  reform 
movements.  But  for  the  purposes  of  this  analysis  they  form  the 
kernel. 

Trade  unionism  and  socialism  are  thus  the  natural  enemies  of 
imperialism,  for  they  take  away  from  the  "imperialist"  classes 
the  surplus  incomes  which  form  the  economic  stimulus  of  imperi- 
alism. 

This  does  not  pretend  to  be  a  final  statement  of  the  full  relations 
of  these  forces.  When  we  come  to  political  analysis  we  shall 
perceive  that  the  tendency  of  imperialism  is  to  crush  trade  unionism 
and  to  "nibble"  at  or  parasitically  exploit  state  socialism.  But, 
confining  ourselves  for  the  present  to  the  narrowly  economic  setting, 
trade  unionism  and  state  socialism  may  be  regarded  as  comple- 
mentary forces  arrayed  against  imperialism,  in  as  far  as,  by  divert- 
ing to  working  class  or  public  expenditure  elements  of  income, 
which  would  otherwise  be  surplus  savings,  they  raise  the  general 
standard  of  home  consumption  and  abate  the  pressure  for  foreign 
markets.  Of  course,  if  the  increase  of  working-class  income  were 
wholly  or  chiefly  "saved,"  not  spent,  or  if  the  taxation  of  unearned 
incomes  were  utilized  for  the  relief  of  other  taxes  borne  by  the 
possessing  classes,  no  such  result  as  we  have  described  would 
follow.  There  is,  however,  no  reason  to  anticipate  this  result 
from  trade  union  or  socialistic  measures.  Though  no  sufficient 
natural  stimulus  exists  to  force  the  well-to-do  classes  to  spend  in 
further  luxuries  the  surplus  incomes  which  they  save,  every  working- 
class  family  is  subject  to  powerful  stimuli  of  economic  needs,  and 
a  reasonably  governed  State  would  regard  as  its  prime  duty  the 
relief  of  the  present  poverty  of  public  life  by  new  forms  of  socially 
useful  expenditure. 

But  we  are  not  here  concerned  with  what  belongs  to  the  practical 
issues  of  political  and  economic  policy.  It  is  the  economic  theory 
for  which  we  claim  acceptance  —  a  theory  which,  if  accurate,  dis- 
pels the  delusion  that  expansion  of  foreign  trade,  and  therefore 
of  empire,  is  a  necessity  of  national  life. 


The  Economic  Foundations  of  Imperialism      637 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Reinsch,  World  Politics  and  Colonial  Administration.  Hobhouse, 
Democracy  and  Reaction.  Jebb,  Studies  in  Colonial  Nationalism.  Cun- 
ingham,  A  Scheme  for  Imperial  Federation.  Conant,  The  United  States 
in  the  Orient  Reich,  Imperialism;  its  prices;  its  vocation. 


CHAPTER  H 

THE  GREAT  INDIAN   MUTINY 

THE  contest  between  the  British  and  the  Indian  princes  for  the 
decaying  Moghul  empire,  which  opened  seriously  at  the  battle  of 
Plassey  in  1757,  continued  steadily  either  in  open  war  or  by  way  of 
"peaceful  penetration."  As  a  result,  by  the  middle  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  the  valleys  of  the  Ganges  and  Indus  rivers,  the 
eastern  and  western  coast  lines  and  great  regions  in  the  heart  of 
the  peninsula  had  become  immediate  possessions  of  the  British; 
the  remainder  of  the  body  of  the  peninsula  consisted  of  "protected 
States,"  also  British  for  practical  purposes;  and  only  the  northern 
regions  towards  China  remained  independent.  While  many  of 
these  States  had  been  added  peaceably,  the  great  majority  of  them 
had  been  wrested  from  the  natives  by  force.  The  germs  of 
revolt  were  thus  planted  by  the  conquerors  themselves,  and  in  1857 
the  great  Mutiny  broke  out  which  marked  a  crisis  in  the  history 
of  British  dominion  in  India  and  a  new  epoch  in  the  government 
of  that  country. 

§  i.   Causes  of  the  Mutiny1 

The  various  motives  assigned  for  the  Mutiny  appear  inadequate 
to  the  European  mind.  The  truth  seems  to  be  that  native  opinion 
throughout  India  was  in  a  ferment,  predisposing  men  to  believe 
the  wildest  stories  and  to  rush  into  action  in  a  paroxysm  of  terror. 
Panic  acts  on  an  Oriental  population  like  drink  upon  a  European 
mob.  The  annexation  policy  of  Lord  Dalhousie,  although  dictated 
by  the  most  enlightened  considerations,  was  distasteful  to  the 
native  mind.  The  spread  of  education,  the  appearance  at  the 

1  Hunter,  A  Brief  History  oj  the  Indian  Peoples,  chap.  xv.  By  permis- 
sion of  the  Delegates  of  the  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford. 

638 


The  Great  Indian   Mutiny  639 

same  moment  of  the  steam  engine  and  the  telegraph  wire,  seemed 
to  reveal  a  deep  plan  for  substituting  an  English  for  an  Indian 
civilization.  The  Bengal  Sepoys  especially  thought  that  they 
could  see  farther  than  the  rest  of  their  countrymen.  Most  of 
them  were  Hindus  of  high  caste;  many  of  them  were  recruited 
from  Oudh.  They  regarded  our  reforms  on  Western  lines  as 
attacks  on  their  own  nationality,  and  they  knew  at  first  hand  what 
annexation  meant.  They  believed  it  was  by  their  prowess  that 
the  Punjab  had  been  conquered,  and  that  all  India  was  held.  The 
numerous  dethroned  princes,  or  their  heirs  and  widows,  were  the 
first  to  learn  and  take  advantage  of  this  spirit  of  disaffection  and 
panic.  They  had  heard  of  the  Crimean  War,  and  were  told  that 
Russia  was  the  perpetual  enemy  of  England.  Our  munificent 
pensions  had  supplied  the  funds  with  which  they  could  buy  the  aid 
of  skilful  intriguers. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Company  had  not  sufficiently  opened  up 
the  higher  posts  in  its  service  to  natives  of  education,  talent,  or 
proved  fidelity.  It  had  taken  important  steps  in  this  direction  in 
respect  to  the  lower  grades  of  appointments.  But  the  prizes 
of  Indian  official  life,  many  of  which  are  now  thrown  open  to 
natives  of  India  by  the  crown,  were  then  the  monopoly  of  a  handful 
of  Englishmen.  Shortly  before  the  Mutiny,  Sir  Henry  Lawrence 
pointed  out  that  even  the  army  supplied  no  career  to  a  native  officer 
which  could  satisfy  the  reasonable  ambition  of  an  able  man.  He 
insisted  on  the  serious  dangers  arising  from  this  state  of  things; 
but  his  warnings  were  unheeded  till  too  late.  In  the  crisis  of  the 
Mutiiy  they  were  remembered.  He  was  nominated  provisional 
governor-general  in  event  of  any  accident  happening  to  Lord 
Canning;  and  the  Queen's  proclamation,  on  the  transfer  of  the 
government  from  the  Company  to  the  crown  at  the  end  of  the  great 
struggle,  affirmed  the  principle  which  he  had  so  powerfully  urged. 
"And  it  is  our  further  will,"  are  her  Majesty's  gracious  words, 
"that  so  far  as  may  be,  our  subjects,  of  whatever  race  or 
creed,  be  freely  and  impartially  admitted  to  offices  in  our 
service,  the  duties  of  which  they  may  be  qualified  by  their 
education,  ability,  and  integrity  duly  to  discharge."  Under 
the  Company  this  liberal  policy  was  unknown.  The  Sepoy 
Mutiny  of  1857,  therefore,  found  many  of  the  Indian  princes, 
especially  the  dethroned  dynasties,  hostile  to  the  Company;  while 
a  multitude  of  its  own  native  officers  were  either  actively  dis- 
loyal or  indifferent  to  its  fate. 

In  this  critical  state  of  affairs,  a  rumor  ran  through  the  native 


640  English  Historians 

army  that  the  cartridges  served  out  to  the  Bengal  regiments  had 
been  greased  with  the  fat  of  pigs  —  animals  which  are  unclean  alike 
to  Hindu  and  Muhammadan.  No  assurances  could  quiet  the 
minds  of  the  Sepoys.  Indeed,  the  evidence  shows  that  a  disas- 
trous blunder  had  in  truth  been  made  in  this  matter  —  a  blunder 
which,  although  quickly  remedied,  was  remedied  too  late.  Fires 
occurred  nightly  in  the  native  lines ;  officers  were  insulted  by  their 
men;  confidence  was  gone,  and  only  the  form  of  discipline  re- 
mained. 

In  addition,  the  outbreak  of  the  storm  found  the  native  regi- 
ments denuded  of  many  of  their  best  officers.  The  administra- 
tion of  the  great  empire  to  which  Dalhousie  had  put  the  corner- 
stone required  a  larger  staff  than  the  civil  service  could  supply. 
The  practice  of  selecting  able  military  men  for  civil  posts,  which 
had  long  existed,  received  a  sudden  and  vast  development.  Oudh, 
the  Punjab,  the  Central  Provinces,  British  Burma,  were  admin- 
istered to  a  large  extent  by  picked  officers  from  the  Company's 
regiments.  Good  and  skilful  commanders  remained;  but  the 
native  army  had  nevertheless  been  drained  of  many  of  its  brightest 
intellects  and  firmest  wills  at  the  very  crisis  of  its  fate.  At  the 
same  time  the  British  troops  in  India  had,  in  spite  of  Lord  Dal- 
housie's  remonstrances,  been  reduced  far  below  the  strength  which 
the  great  governor-general  declared  to  be  essential  to  the  safety 
of  our  rule.  His  earnest  representations  on  this  subject,  and  as  to 
the  urgent  necessity  for  a  reform  alike  of  the  native  and  the  British 
armies  of  India,  were  lying  disregarded  in  London  when  the  panic 
about  the  "greased  cartridges"  spread  through  the  native  regi- 
ments, and  the  storm  burst  upon  Bengal. 

§  2.   The  Outbreak  and  Course  of  the  Mutiny 

On  the  afternoon  of  Sunday,  May  10,  1857,  the  Sepoys  at  Mee- 
rut  (Mirath)  broke  into  open  mutiny.  They  forced  open  the  jail, 
and  rushed  in  a  wild  torrent  through  the  cantonments,  cutting 
down  any  European  whom  they  met.  They  then  streamed  off 
to  the  neighboring  city  of  Delhi,  to  stir  up  the  native  garrison  and 
the  criminal  population  of  that  great  city,  and  to  place  themselves 
under  the  authority  of  the  discrowned  Mughal  Emperor.  Meerut 
was  then  the  largest  military  station  in  Northern  India,  with  a 
strong  European  garrison  of  foot,  horse,  and  guns,  sufficient  to 
overwhelm  the  mutineers  long  before  they  could  have  reached 
Delhi.  But  as  the  Sepoys  acted  in  irrational  panic,  so  the  British 


The  Great  Indian   Mutiny  641 

officers,  in  but  too  many  cases,  behaved  with  equally  irrational 
indecision.  The  news  of  the  outbreak  was  telegraphed  to  Delhi, 
and  nothing  more  was  done  at  Meerut  that  night.  At  the  moment 
when  one  strong  will  might  have  saved  India,  no  soldier  in  authority 
at  Meerut  seemed  able  to  think  or  act.  The  next  morning  the 
Muhammadans  of  Delhi  arose,  and  all  that  the  Europeans  there 
could  do  was  to  blow  up  the  magazine. 

A  rallying  centre  and  a  traditional  name  were  thus  given  to  the 
revolt,  which  forthwith  spread  like  wildfire  through  the  North- 
western Provinces  and  Oudh  down  into  Lower  Bengal.  The 
same  narrative  must  suffice  for  all  the  outbreaks,  although  each 
episode  has  its  own  story  of  sadness  and  devotion.  The  Sepoys 
rose  on  their  officers,  usually  without  warning,  sometimes  after 
protestations  of  fidelity  —  protestations  in  some  cases  perhaps 
true  at  the  moment.  The  Europeans,  or  persons  of  Christian 
faith,  were  often  massacred;  occasionally,  also,  the  women  and 
children.  The  jail  was  broken  open,  the  treasury  plundered,  and 
the  mutineers  marched  off  to  some  centre  of  revolt,  to  join  in  what 
had  now  become  a  national  war.  Only  in  the  Punjab  were  the 
Sepoys  anticipated  by  stern  measures  of  repression  and  disarma- 
ment carried  out  by  Sir  John  Lawrence  and  his  lieutenants, 
among  whom  Edwards  and  Nicholson  stand  conspicuous.  The 
Sikh  population  never  wavered.  Crowds  of  willing  Muhammadan 
recruits  joined  us  from  the  Afghan  hills,  and  thus  the  Punjab, 
instead  of  being  itself  a  source  of  danger,  was  able  to  furnish  a  por- 
tion of  its  own  garrison  for  the  siege  of  Delhi.  In  Lower  Bengal 
most  of  the  Sepoys  mutinied,  and  then  dispersed  in  different 
directions.  The  native  armies  of  Madras  and  Bombay  remained, 
on  the  whole,  true  to  their  colors.  In  Central  India,  the  contingents 
of  some  of  the  great  chiefs  sooner  or  later  threw  in  their  lot  with 
the  rebels,  but  the  Muhammadan  State  of  Haidarabad  was  kept 
loyal  by  the  authority  of  its  able  minister,  Sir  Salar  Jang. 

The  main  interest  of  the  Sepoy  War  gathers  round  the  three 
cities  of  Cawnpur,  Lucknow,  and  Delhi.  The  cantonments  at 
Cawnpur  contained  one  of  the  great  native  garrisons  of 
India.  At  Bithur,  not  far  off,  was  the  palace  of  Dundhu  Panth, 
the  heir  of  the  last  Peshwa,  whose  more  familiar  name  of  Nana 
Sahib  will  ever  be  handed  down  to  infamy.  At  first  the  Nana  was 
profuse  in  his  professions  of  loyalty;  but  when  the  Sepoys  mutinied 
at  Cawnpur  on  the  6th  June,  he  put  himself  at  their  head,  and  was 
proclaimed  Peshwa  of  the  Marathas.  The  Europeans  at  Cawn- 
pur, numbering  more  women  and  children  than  fighting  men,  shut 


642  English  Historians 

themselves  up  in  an  ill-chosen  hasty  intrenchment,  where  they 
heroically  bore  a  siege  for  nineteen  days  under  the  sun  of  a  tropical 
June.  Every  one  had  courage  and  endurance  to  suffer  or  to  die; 
but  the  directing  mind  was  again  absent.  On  the  zyth  June, 
trusting  to  a  safe-conduct  from  the  Nana,  —  a  safe-conduct  sup- 
posed to  hold  good  as  far  as  Allahabad,  —  they  surrendered,  and  to 
the  number  of  four  hundred  and  fifty  embarked  in  boats  on  the 
Ganges.  A  murderous  fire  was  opened  upon  them  from  the  river 
bank.  Only  a  single  boat  escaped;  and  four  men,  who  swam 
across  to  the  protection  of  a  friendly  Raja,  survived  to  tell  the  tale. 
The  rest  of  the  men  were  massacred  on  the  spot.  The  women 
and  children,  numbering  one  hundred  and  twenty-five,  were 
reserved  for  the  same  fate  on  the  i  $th  July,  when  the  avenging 
army  of  Havelock  was  at  hand. 

Sir  Henry  Lawrence,  the  chief  commissioner  of  Oudh,  had  fore- 
seen the  storm.  He  fortified  and  provisioned  the  residency  at 
Lucknow;  and  thither  he  retired,  with  all  the  European  inhabit- 
ants and  a  weak  British  regiment,  on  the  2nd  July.  Two  days 
later,  he  was  mortally  wounded  by  a  shell.  But  the  clear  head  was 
here  in  authority.  Sir  Henry  Lawrence  had  deliberately  chosen 
his  position;  and  the  little  garrison  held  out,  under  unparalleled 
hardships  and  against  enormous  odds,  until  relieved  by  Havelock 
and  Outram  on  the  25th  of  September.  But  the  relieving  force 
was  itself  invested  by  fresh  swarms  of  rebels,  and  it  was  not  till 
November  that  Sir  Colin  Campbell  (afterwards  Lord  Clyde)  cut 
his  way  into  Lucknow  and  effected  the  final  deliverance  of  the 
garrison  (i6th  November,  1857).  Our  troops  then  withdrew 
to  more  urgent  work,  and  did  not  permanently  re-occupy  Lucknow 
till  March,  1858. 

The  siege  of  Delhi  began  on  the  8th  June,  a  month  after 
the  original  outbreak  at  Meerut.  Siege  in  the  proper  sense  of  the 
word  it  was  not;  for  our  army,  encamped  on  the  historic  "ridge" 
of  Delhi,  never  exceeded  eight  thousand  men,  while  the  rebels 
within  the  walls  were  more  than  thirty  thousand  strong.  In 
the  middle  of  August,  Nicholson  arrived  with  a  reenforcement 
from  the  Punjab;  his  own  inspiring  presence  was  perhaps  even 
more  valuable  than  the  reenforcement  he  brought.  On  the 
i4th  September  the  assault  was  delivered;  and,  after  six  days' 
desperate  fighting  in  the  streets,  Delhi  was  again  won.  Nicholson 
fell  heroically  at  the  head  of  the  storming  party.  Hodson,  the 
daring  but  unscrupulous  leader  of  a  corps  of  irregular  horse, 
hunted  down  next  day  the  old  Mughal  Emperor,  Bahadur 


The  Great  Indian   Mutiny  643 

Shah,  and  his  sons.  The  Emperor  was  afterwards  sent  a  state 
prisoner  to  Rangoon,  where  he  lived  till  1862.  As  the  mob 
pressed  in  on  the  guard  around  the  Emperor's  sons,  near  Delhi, 
Hodson  thought  it  necessary  to  shoot  down  the  princes  (who  had 
been  captured  unconditionally)  with  his  own  hand. 

After  the  fall  of  Delhi  and  the  final  relief  of  Lucknow,  the  war 
loses  its  dramatic  interest,  although  fighting  still  went  on  in  various 
parts  of  the  country  for  about  eighteen  months.  The  population 
of  Oudh  and  Rohilkhand,  stimulated  by  the  presence  of  the  Begam 
of  Oudh,  the  Nawab  of  Bareilly,  and  Nana  Sahib  himself,  had 
joined  the  mutinous  Sepoys  en  masse.  In  this  quarter  of  India 
alone  it  was  the  revolt  of  a  people  rather  than  the  mutiny  of  an 
army  that  had  to  be  quelled.  Sir  Colin  Campbell  conducted 
the  campaign  in  Oudh,  which  lasted  through  two  cold  seasons. 
Valuable  assistance  was  lent  by  Sir  Jang  Bahadur  of  Nepal, 
at  the  head  of  his  gallant  Gurkhas.  Town  after  town  was 
occupied,  fort  after  fort  was  stormed,  until  the  last  gun  had 
been  recaptured,  and  the  last  fugitive  had  been  chased  across 
the  frontier  by  January,  1859.  .  .  . 

§  3.   Settlement  in  India  at  the  Close  of  the  Mutiny 

The  Mutiny  sealed  the  fate  of  the  East  India  Company,  after 
a  life  of  more  than  two  and  a  half  centuries.  The  original  Com- 
pany received  its  charter  of  incorporation  from  Elizabeth  in  1600. 
Its  political  powers  and  the  Constitution  of  the  Indian  government 
were  derived  from  the  Regulating  Act  of  1773,  passed  by  the  min- 
istry o!  Lord  North.  By  that  statute  the  governor  of  Bengal 
was  raised  to  the  rank  of  governor-general ;  and,  in  conjunction 
with  his  council  of  four  members,  he  was  intrusted  with  the  duty 
of  controlling  the  governments  of  Madras  and  Bombay,  so  far  as 
regarded  questions  of  peace  and  war;  a  supreme  court  of  judica- 
ture was  appointed  at  Calcutta,  to  which  the  judges  were  nomi- 
nated by  the  crown;  and  a  power  of  making  rules  and  regulations 
was  conferred  upon  the  governor-general  and  his  council.  Next 
came  the  India  Bill  of  Pitt  (1784),  which  founded  the  board  of 
control  in  England,  strengthened  the  supremacy  of  Bengal  over 
the  other  presidencies,  and  first  authorized  the  historic  phrase, 
"governor-general-in-council." 

The  renewed  charter  of  1813  abolished  the  Company's  monopoly 
of  Indian  trade  and  compelled  it  to  direct  its  energies  to  the  good 
government  of  the  people.  The  Act  of  1833,  at  the  next  renewal 


644  English  Historians 

of  the  Company's  charter  for  another  twenty  years,  did  away  with 
its  remaining  trade  to  China.  It  also  introduced  successive  re- 
forms into  the  Constitution  of  the  Indian  government.  It  added 
to  the  council  a  new  (legal)  member,  who  need  not  be  chosen  from 
among  the  Company's  servants,  and  who  was  at  first  entitled  to  be 
present  only  at  the  meetings  for  making  laws  and  regulations;  it 
accorded  the  authority  of  acts  of  Parliament  to  the  laws  and  regu- 
lations so  made,  subject  to  the  disallowance  of  the  court  of  direc- 
tors; it  appointed  a  law  commission;  and  it  finally  gave  to  the 
governor-general-in-council  a  control  over  the  other  presidencies, 
in  all  points  relating  to  the  civil  or  military  administration.  The 
charter  of  the  Company  was  renewed  for  the  last  time  in  1853,  not 
for  a  definite  period  of  years,  but  only  for  so  long  as  Parliament 
should  see  fit.  On  this  occasion  the  number  of  directors  was 
reduced,  and  their  patronage  as  regards  appointments  to  the  civil 
service  was  taken  away,  to  make  room  for  the  principle  of  open 
competition. 

The  Act  for  the  Better  Government  of  India  (1858),  which 
finally  transferred  the  administration  from  the  Company  to  the 
crown,  was  not  passed  without  an  eloquent  protest  from  the  direc- 
tors, nor  without  bitter  party  discussions  in  Parliament.  It  enacted 
that  India  shall  be  governed  by,  and  in  the  name  of,  the  Queen  of 
England  through  one  of  her  principal  secretaries  of  state,  assisted 
by  a  council  of  fifteen  members.  The  governor-general  received 
the  new  title  of  viceroy.  The  European  troops  of  the  company, 
numbering  about  24,000  officers  and  men,  were  amalgamated 
with  the  royal  service,  and  the  Indian  navy  was  abolished. 
By  the  Indian  Councils  Act  (1861)  the  governor-general's  council, 
and  also  the  councils  at  Madras  and  Bombay,  were  augmented 
by  the  addition  of  non-official  members,  either  natives  or 
Europeans,  for  legislative  purposes  only;  and,  by  another  act 
passed  in  the  same  year,  high  courts  of  judicature  were  con- 
stituted out  of  the  old  supreme  courts  at  the  presidency 
towns. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Innes,  Luck  now  and  Oude  in  the  Mutiny.  Malleson,  The  Indian 
Mutiny  oj  1857.  Kaye  and  Malleson,  History  of  the  Sepoy  War  and  the 
Indian  Mutiny  (6  vols.).  Shadwell,  Life  of  Colin  Campbell,  Lord  Clyde 


CHAPTER   III 

THE  AUSTRALIAN   CONSTITUTION 

IN  the  constitutions  of  the  various  English-speaking  colonies, 
which  form  a  part  of  the  British  empire,  one  has  an  excellent 
opportunity  to  study  the  forms  of  government  which  Englishmen 
work  out  when  free  from  the  trammels  of  the  historical  traditions 
and  economic  conditions  of  the  mother  country.  Feudal  aristoc- 
racy, which  originated  largely  in  conquest  and  confiscation,  as 
De  Tocqueville  long  ago  pointed  out,  has  had  no  opportunity  to 
reproduce  itself  in  the  colonies  of  modern  times.  As  a  result,  that 
feature  of  the  British  Constitution  is  absent  in  the  colonies  as  in  the 
United  States.  The  most  interesting,  perhaps,  of  all  the  constitu- 
tions formed  under  these  new  conditions  is  that  which  recently 
federated  the  Australian  States  into  a  Commonwealth.  It  is 
doubly  interesting  on  account  of  the  various  problems  of  social 
reform  and  control  which  the  Australian  colonies  are  working  out 
indiviaually,  and  will  doubtless  continue  to  work  out  on]  a  larger^- 
scale  under  the  new  Constitution.  Fortunately  we  havevKrmuie 
pen  of  Mr.  Bryce,  whose  book  on  the  American  Commonwealth 
has  laid  all  Americans  under  a  great  debt,  a  brief  description  of  the 
newly  erected  government. 

§  i.    The  Land  and  People  of  Australia  1 

Before  examining  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  which  is 
bringing  the  hitherto  independent  colonies  into  one  political  body, 
it  is  well  to  consider  for  a  moment  the  territory  and  the  inhabitants 
that  are  to  be  thus  united. 

1  Bryce,  Studies  in  History  and  Jurisprudence,  pp.  403  ff.  By  permis- 
sion of  the  American  Branch  of  the  Oxford  Press. 

645 


646  English   Historians 

The  total  area  of  Australia  is  nearly  3,000,000  square  miles,  not 
much  less  than  that  of  Europe.  Of  this  a  comparatively  small 
part  is  peopled  by  white  men ;  for  the  interior,  as  well  as  vast  tracts 
stretching  inland  from  the  southwestern  and  northwestern  coasts, 
is  almost  rainless,  and  supplies,  even  in  its  better  districts,  nothing 
more  than  a  scanty  growth  of  shrubs.  Much  of  it  is  lower  than  the 
regions  towards  the  coast,  and  parts  are  but  little  above  sea-level. 
It  has  been  hitherto  deemed  incapable  of  supporting  human  settle- 
ment, and  unfit  even  for  such  ranching  as  is  practised  on  arid 
tracts  in  Western  North  America  and  in  South  Africa.  Modern 
science  has  brought  so  many  unexpected  things  to  pass,  that  this 
conclusion  may  prove  to  have  been  too  hasty.  Still  no  growth  of 
population  in  the  interior  can  be  looked  for  corresponding  to  that 
which  marked  the  development  of  the  United  States  west  of  the 
Alleghanies  in  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

Of  the  six  Australian  colonies,  one,  Tasmania,  occupies  an 
island  of  its  own,  fertile  and  beautiful,  but  rather  smaller 
(26,000  square  miles)  than  Scotland  or  South  Carolina.  It  lies 
150  miles  from  the  coast  of  Victoria.  Western  Australia 
covers  an  enormous  area  (nearly  1,000,000  square  miles,  between 
three  and  four  times  the  size  of  Texas),  and  South  Aus- 
tralia, which  stretches  right  across  the  continent  to  the  Gulf  of 
Carpentaria,  is  almost  as  large  (a  little  over  900,000  square  miles). 
Queensland  is  smaller,  with  668,000  square  miles;  New  South 
Wales,  on  the  other  hand,  has  only  310,000  square  miles  (i.e.  is 
rather  larger  than  Norway  and  Sweden,  and  about  the-  size  of 
California,  Oregon,  and  Washington  put  together);  Victoria 
only  87,000  (i.e.  is  as  large  as  Great  Britain  and  a  little  larger  than 
Idaho).  The  country  (including  Tasmania)  stretches  from  north 
to  south  over  32°  of  latitude  (11°  S.  to  43°  S.),  a  wider  range  than 
that  of  the  United  States  (lat.  49°  N.  to  26°  N.).  There  are  thus 
even  greater  contrasts  of  climate  than  in  the  last-named  country, 
for  though  the  Tasmanian  winters  are  less  cold  than  those  of 
Montana,  the  tropical  heats  of  North  Queensland  and  the 
shores  of  the  Gulf  of  Carpentaria  exceed  any  temperature  reached 
in  Louisiana  and  Texas.  Fortunately,  Northern  Australia  is,  for 
its  latitude,  comparatively  free  from  malarial  fevers.  But  it  is 
too  hot  for  the  out-door  labor  of  white  men.  In  these  marked 
physical  differences  between  the  extremities  of  the  continent  there 
lie  sources  whence  may  spring  divergences  not  only  of  material 
interests,  but  ultimately  even  of  character,  —  divergences  compar- 
able to  those  which  made  the  Gulf  States  of  the  American  Union 


The  Australian  Constitution  647 

find  themselves  drawn  apart  from  the  States  of  the  North  Atlantic 
and  Great  Lakes. 

It  must  also  be  noted  that  the  great  central  wilderness  cuts  off 
not  only  the  tropical  north  and  northwest,  but  also  the  more  tem- 
perate parts  of  the  west  from  the  thickly  peopled  regions  of  the 
southwest.  Western  Australia  communicates  with  her  Eastern 
sisters  only  by  a  long  sea  voyage.  She  is  almost  in  the  position 
held  by  California  when,  before  the  making  of  the  first  transcon- 
tinental railway,  people  went  from  New  York  to  San  Francisco  via 
Panama.  Nor  is  there  much  prospect  that  settlements  will  arise 
here  and  there  in  the  intervening  desert. 

The  population  of  the  continent,  which  has  now  reached  nearly 
4,000,000,  is  very  unequally  distributed.  The  three  colonies  of 
widest  area,  Western  Australia,  South  Australia,  and  Queensland, 
have  none  of  them  500,000  inhabitants.  Tasmania  has  about 
170,000.  Two  others,  New  South  Wales  and  Victoria,  have  each 
more  than  1,000,000.  This  disparity  ranges  them  for  political 
purposes  into  two  groups,  —  the  large  ones  with  2,500,000  people 
in  two  colonies,  and  the  small  ones  with  1,500,000  in  four  colonies. 

Against  these  two  sets  of  differences,  physical  and  social,  which 
might  be  expected  to  induce  an  opposition  of  economic  and  political 
interests,  there  is  to  be  placed  the  fact  that  the  Australian  colonies 
are  singularly  homogeneous  in  population.  British  North  America 
is  peopled  by  a  French  as  well  as  by  an  English  race,  British  South 
Africa  by  a  Dutch  race  as  well  as  an  English.  But  Australia  is 
purely  British.  Even  the  Irish  and  the  Scotch,  though  both  races 
are  specially  prone  to  emigrate,  seem  less  conspicuous  than  they 
are  in  Canada.  Australia  is  to-day  almost  as  purely  English  as 
Massachusetts,  Connecticut,  and  Virginia  were  in  1776,  and 
probably  more  English  than  were  the  thirteen  original  States  taken 
as  a  whole.  In  this  fact  the  colonies  found  not  only  an  inducement 
to  a  closer  union,  but  a  security  against  the  occurrence  of  one  of  the 
dangers  which  most  frequently  threatens  the  internal  concord  of 
a  federation.  Race  antagonisms  have  troubled  not  only  Canada 
and  South  Africa,  but  the  United  Kingdom  itself,  and  they  now 
constitute  the  gravest  of  the  perils  that  surround  the  Austro-Hun- 
garian  monarchy. 

Among  the  other  favoring  conditions  may  be  enumerated  the  use 
of  one  language  only  (whereas  in  Canada  and  South  Africa  two 
are  spoken),  the  existence  of  one  system  of  law,  the  experience  of 
the  same  form  of  political  institutions,  a  form  modelled  on  that 
which  the  venerable  traditions  of  the  mother  country  have  endeared 


648  English  Historians 

to  Englishmen  in  all  parts  of  the  world.  It  has  also  been  a  piece  of 
good  fortune  that  religion  has  not  interposed  any  grounds  for  jeal- 
ousy or  division.  The  population  of  Australia  is  divided  among 
various  Christian  denominations  very  much  as  the  population  of 
England  is,  and  the  chief  difference  between  the  old  and  the  new 
country  lies  in  the  greater  friendliness  to  one  another  of  various 
communions  which  exists  in  the  new  country,  a  happy  result  due 
partly  to  the  absence  of  any  state  establishment  of  religion,  and 
partly  to  that  sense  of  social  equality  which  is  strong  enough  to 
condemn  any  attempt  on  the  part  of  one  religious  body  to  claim 
social  superiority  over  the  others. 

Finally,  there  is  the  unique  position  which  Australia  occupies. 
She  has  a  perfect  natural  frontier,  because  she  is  surrounded  by  the 
sea,  an  island  continent,  so  far  removed  from  all  other  civilized 
nations  that  she  is  not  likely  to  be  either  threatened  by  their  attacks 
or  entangled  in  their  alliances.  The  United  States  had,  when  its 
career  began,  British  possessions  on  the  north,  French  and  Spanish 
on  the  south.  But  the  tropical  islands  which  Holland,  Germany, 
and  France  claim  as  theirs,  to  the  north  and  east  of  the  Australian 
coasts,  are  cut  off  by  a  wide  stretch  of  ocean.  They  are  not  now, 
and  are  not  likely  at  any  time  we  can  foresee,  to  contain  a  white 
population  capable  of  disturbing  the  repose  of  Australia.  Such  a 
country  seems  made  for  one  nation,  though  the  fact  that  its  settled 
regions  lie  scattered  round  a  vast  central  wilderness  suggests  that 
it  is  better  fitted  for  a  federation  than  for  a  government  of  the  uni- 
fied type.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  this  very  remoteness  might, 
in  removing  the  force  of  external  pressure,  have  weakened  the 
sense  of  need  for  a  federal  union  had  there  not  existed  that  homo- 
geneity of  race  and  that  aspiring  national  sentiment  to  which  I 
have  adverted. 

Compare  these  conditions  with  those  of  the  three  other  federa- 
tions. The  thirteen  other  colonies  which  have  grown  into  the 
present  forty-five  States  of  the  American  Union  lay  continuous 
with  one  another  along  the  coast  of  the  Atlantic.  England  held 
Canada  to  the  north  of  them.  France  held  the  Mississippi  Valley  to 
the  west  of  them,  and,  still  farther  to  the  west,  Spain  held  the 
coasts  of  the  Pacific.  They  had  at  that  time  no  natural  boundaries 
on  land ;  and  the  forces  that  drew  them  together  were  local  con- 
tiguity, race  unity,  and  above  all  the  sense  that  they  must  combine 
to  protect  themselves  against  powerful  neighbors  as  well  as  against 
the  evils  which  had  become  so  painfully  evident  in  the  governments 
of  the  several  States.  Nature  prescribed  union,  though  few  dreamt 


The  Australian  Constitution  649 

that  Nature  meant  that  union  to  cover  the  whole  central  belt  of  a 
continent.  In  the  case  of  Canada,  Nature  spoke  with  a  more  doubt- 
ful voice.  She  might  rather  have  appeared  to  suggest  that  this 
long  and  narrow  strip  of  habitable  but  only  partially  inhabited 
land,  stretching  from  the  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  to  Puget  Sound, 
should  either  all  of  it  unite  with  its  mighty  neighbor  to  the  south, 
or  should  form  three  or  four  separate  groups,  separated  by  inter- 
vening wildernesses.  Political  feelings,  however,  compounded  of 
attachment  to  Britain  and  a  proud  resolve  not  to  be  merged  in  a 
rival  power  which  had  done  nothing  to  conciliate  them,  led  the 
Canadians  to  form  a  confederation  of  their  own,  which  Nature  has 
blessed  in  this  point  at  least,  that  its  territories  are  so  similar  in 
climate  and  in  conditions  for  industrial  growth  that  few  economic 
antagonisms  seem  likely  to  arise  among  them.  Switzerland,  how- 
ever, is  the  most  remarkable  case  of  a  federation  formed  by  his- 
torical causes  in  the  very  teeth,  as  it  might  seem,  of  ethnological 
obstacles.  Three  races,  speaking  three  languages,  have  been  so 
squeezed  together  by  formidable  neighbors  as  to  have  grown  into 
one.  The  help  of  Nature  has  however  been  given  in  providing 
them  with  mountain  fastnesses  from  which  the  armies  of  those 
neighbors  could  be  resisted;  and  the  physical  character  of  the 
country  has  joined  with  the  traditions  of  a  splendid  warlike  hero- 
ism in  creating  a  patriotism  perhaps  more  intense  than  any  other 
in  the  modern  world. 

§  2.    Position  of  the  States  in  the  Australian  Federation 

The  Australian  Constitution,  like  that  of  the  United  States, 
assumes  the  States  to  be  already  organized  communities,  and 
contains  nothing  regarding  their  constitutions.  The  case  of 
Canada  was  different,  because  there  the  previous  government  of 
the  Upper  and  Lower  Provinces,  which  had  been  one,  had  to  be 
cut  in  two,  and  arrangements  made  for  duly  constituting  the  two 
halves.  But  in  the  case  of  Australia,  the  preexisting  constitutions 
of  the  colonies,  granted  by  the  imperial  government  at  various 
times,  go  on  unchanged,  subject  only  to  the  supersession  of  some  of 
their  functions  by  the  Commonwealth,  and  to  one  or  two  specifi- 
cally mentioned  restrictions.  That  these  restrictions  are  com- 
paratively few  may  be  partly  ascribed  to  that  aversion  which  the 
English  everywhere  show  to  this  kind  of  safeguard  against  the 
misuse  of  legislature  power.  The  omnipotence  of  the  British 
Parliament  seems  to  have  fostered  the  notion  that  all  Parliaments 


650  English   Historians 

ought  to  be  free  to  do  wrong  as  well  as  to  do  right.  The  only 
things  from  which  a  State  is  disabled  are  the  keeping  of  a  naval  or 
military  force  (except  with  the  consent  of  the  commonwealth 
Parliament),  coining  money,  and  making  anything  but  gold  and 
silver  coin  legal  tender.  A  State  is  not,  as  are  the  American  States, 
forbidden  to  grant  titles  of  nobility,  or  to  pass  any  ex  post  facto 
law  or  law  "impairing  the  obligation  of  contracts."  That  no  such 
prohibitions  exist  in  Canada  may  be  ascribed  to  the  fact  that  in 
Canada  the  national  or  Dominion  government  has  the  right  of 
vetoing  laws  passed  by  provincial  legislatures,  so  that  improper 
legislation  can  be  in  this  way  checked.  The  power  is  not  often 
exercised  in  Canada,  but  when  exercised  has  sometimes  led  to 
friction.  This  plan,  however,  is  neither  so  respectful  to  the  Prov- 
inces nor  so  conformable  to  general  principles  as  is  the  American 
plan,  which  leaves  the  States  subject  only  to  the  restrictions  imposed 
by  the  Constitution  —  restrictions  which  ipso  iure  annul  a  law  at- 
tempting to  transgress  them.  And  the  Australians  have  wisely 
followed  the  American  rather  than  the  Canadian  precedent. 
The  Australians  have,  to  be  sure,  in  reserve  a  power  to  which 
nothing  similar  exists  in  America,  viz.,  the  right  of  the  British 
crown  at  home  to  veto  legislation.  Rarely  as  this  right  is  put  in 
force  it  might  conceivably  be  used  at  the  instance  of  the  national 
government  to  avert  an  undesirable  conflict  between  state  statutes 
and  national  statutes.  Note  further  that  each  Australian  State 
is  left  as  free  to  amend  its  own  Constitution  as  it  was  before,  sub- 
ject of  course  to  the  veto  of  the  British  crown,  but  to  no  interference 
by  the  Commonwealth ;  whereas  in  Canada  acts  of  the  provincial 
legislatures  amending  their  constitutions  are  subject  to  the  veto  of 
the  Dominion  government  as  representing  the  crown. 

The  omission  of  any  provision  similar  to  the  famous  and 
much  litigated  clause  which  debars  an  American  state  legislature 
from  passing  any  law  impairing  the  obligation  of  contracts  is 
especially  noteworthy.  That  clause,  introduced  by  the  Philadel- 
phia Convention  in  order  to  check  the  tendency  of  some  reckless 
States  to  get  rid  of  their  debts,  produced  in  course  of  time  unexpect- 
edly far-reaching  results,  from  some  of  which  American  legis- 
latures and  courts  have  made  ingenious  attempts  to  escape.  It  has 
indeed  been  thought  that  several  subsequent  decisions  of  the  su- 
preme court  are  not  easily  reconcilable  with  the  famous  judgment 
in  the  Dartmouth  College  Case  (A.D.  1818),  in  which  the  full  effect 
of  this  clause  was  for  the  first  time  displayed.  That  effect  has  been 
to  fetter  legislation  in  ways  which  are  found  so  inconvenient  in 


The  Australian  Constitution  651 

practice  that  they  are  acquiesced  in  only  because  many  state 
legislatures  are  in  the  United  States  objects  of  popular  distrust. 
No  corresponding  distrust  seems  to  be  felt  in  the  British  colonies, 
and  therefore  the  Australians  have  not  deemed  any  such  prohibition 
needful,  following  the  example  of  the  British  House  of  Commons, 
which  in  1893  rejected  a  similar  clause  when  moved  as  an  amend- 
ment to  the  Irish  Home  Rule  Bill  of  that  year. 

In  another  point  the  Australian  States  have  been  treated  with 
respect.  In  each  of  them  the  nominal  executive  head  has  hitherto 
been  a  governor  appointed  by  the  British  crown.  This  was  the 
case  in  Canada  prior  to  1867 ;  but  when  the  Canadian  federation 
was  formed,  the  appointment  of  the  governors  of  the  several 
provinces  was  intrusted  to  the  governor-general  of  the  Dominion, 
that  is  to  say,  to  the  Dominion  Cabinet  by  whose  advice  the 
governor-general,  being  a  sort  of  constitutional  monarch,  is  guided. 
In  practice,  therefore,  these  governorships  have  become  rewards 
bestowed  upon  leading  party  politicians.  The  Australians  wisely 
(as  most  Englishmen  will  think)  avoided  this  plan.  Neither  did 
they  adopt  the  American  method  of  letting  the  people  of  each 
State  elect  the  governor,  a  method  unsuited  to  government  on  the 
Cabinet  system,  because,  as  the  state  governor  is  under  that  system 
only  a  nominal  head  of  the  executive  (the  Cabinet  being  the  real 
executive),  there  was  no  good  reason  for  setting  the  people  to 
choose  him,  and  good  reasons  against  doing  so,  inasmuch  as  popu- 
lar elections  are  invariably  fought  on  party  lines.  Accordingly 
the  Australians  have  preferred  to  let  him  continue  to  be  appointed 
by  tbe  home  government,  and  to  allow  him  to  communicate 
directly  with  the  colonial  office  in  London.  His  ministers  are 
indeed  described  in  the  Constitution  (sect.  44)  as  being  "the 
Queen's  ministers." 

Four  other  remarkable  divergences,  from  both  the  American  and 
the  Canadian  federal  systems,  remain  to  be  mentioned. 

One  relates  to  the  judiciary.  In  the  United  States  there  is  a 
complete  system  of  federal  courts  ramifying  all  over  the  Union 
and  exercising  exclusive  jurisdiction  in  all  cases  arising  under 
federal  statutes,  as  well  as  in  a  number  of  other  matters  specified 
in  Art.  Ill,  sect.  2  of  the  Constitution.  But  the  State  courts  remain 
quite  independent  in  all  State  matters,  and  determine  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  State  constitutions  and  of  all  State  statutes,  nor 
does  any  appeal  lie  from  them  to  the  federal  courts.  In  Canada 
this  was  not  thought  necessary,  so  there  the  same  set  of  courts 
deal  with  all  questions  arising  under  federal  statutes  and  with 


652  English  Historians 

those  arising  under  provincial  statutes,  and  the  supreme  court  of 
Canada  receives  appeals  from  all  other  courts.  This  is  less  con- 
formable to  theory  than  the  United  States  plan,  but  does  not  seem 
to  have  worked  ill.  The  danger  that  courts  sitting  in  the  Prov- 
inces would,  under  the  influence  of  local  feeling,  pervert  federal 
law,  was  not  serious  in  Canada  (though  a  similar  danger  was  feared 
in  the  United  States  in  1787),  and  indeed  all  the  Canadian  judges 
are  appointed  by  the  dominion  government,  a  further  illustration 
of  the  preponderance  which  the  nation  has  over  the  Provinces. 
The  Australians  have  taken  a  middle  course.  They  have  estab- 
lished a  federal  supreme  court,  to  be  called  "the  high  court  of 
Australia,"  and  have  taken  power  for  their  Parliament  to  create 
other  federal  courts.  So  far,  they  follow  the  United  States  prece- 
dent. But  they  have  given  power  to  the  commonwealth  Par- 
liament to  invest  state  courts  with  federal  jurisdiction,  thereby 
allowing  those  courts  to  be,  as  in  Canada,  both  state  and  federal. 
And  they  have  also  allowed  an  appeal  from  all  state  courts  to  the 
federal  high  court.  By  this  plan  the  States  are  more  directly 
connected  with  and  subordinate  to  the  national  government  than 
they  are  in  the  United  States.  The  Australian  scheme  has  one 
great  incidental  advantage.  In  the  United  States  the  law  of 
different  States  may  and  does  differ,  not  only  in  respect  of  the  dif- 
ference between  the  statutes  of  one  and  the  statutes  of  another, 
but  also  in  respect  of  questions  of  common  law  untouched  by 
statutes.  The  supreme  court  of  Massachusetts  may,  for  instance, 
take  a  different  view  of  what  constitutes  fraud  at  common  law 
from  that  taken  by  the  supreme  court  of  Pennsylvania,  and  there  is 
no  court  of  appeal  above  these  courts  to  bring  their  views  into 
accord.  This  has  not  happened  to  any  great  extent  in  Australia, 
because  the  British  Privy  Council  has  entertained  appeals  from  all 
its  courts,  and  it  will  happen  still  less  in  future,  because  the  federal 
high  court  will  be  close  at  hand  to  settle  questions  on  which  the 
courts  of  different  States  may  have  been  in  discord. 

A  second  point  shows  how  much  less  powerful  the  sentiment  of 
state  sovereignty  has  been  in  Australia  than  it  was  in  the  United 
States.  By  an  amendment  (XI)  to  the  American  Constitution 
made  in  1798  it  is  expressly  declared  that  no  State  can  be  sued 
by  a  private  plaintiff.  But  Australia  expressly  grants  jurisdic- 
tion in  such  cases  to  its  federal  high  court  (sect.  75). 

A  third  point  is  the  curious  and  novel  power  given  to  a  State  of 
referring  matters  to  the  commonwealth  Parliament,  and  to  that 
Parliament  of  thereupon  legislating  on  such  matters  (sect.  51, 


The  Australian   Constitution  653 

XXXVII).  Under  this  provision  (which  is  not  to  be  found  in 
the  Canadian  Constitution)  there  is  no  department  of  state  law 
wherewith  the  national  legislature  may  not  be  rendered  competent 
to  deal.  It  may  be  usefully  employed  to  secure  uniformity  of 
legislation  over  all  Australia  on  a  number  of  subjects  not  within 
the  specifically  allotted  field  of  the  commonwealth  Parliament. 

Finally,  the  commonwealth  Parliament  may  grant  financial 
assistance  to  any  State,  and  may  take  over  the  whole  or  a  part  of 
its  debts  as  existing  at  the  establishment  of  the  Commonwealth. 
Provisions  such  as  these  imply,  or  will  involve  if  put  in  practice, 
a  relation  between  the  national  government  and  the  States  closer 
than  that  which  exists  in  America. 

To  complete  this  account  of  the  relation  of  the  nation  to  the 
States,  let  it  be  noted  that  the  State  may  surrender  any  part  of  its 
territory  to  the  Commonwealth,  and  that  the  Commonwealth  is 
bound  to  protect  each  State  against  invasion  or,  on  the  application 
of  the  executive  of  the  State,  against  domestic  violence.  This 
latter  provision  is  drawn  from  the  United  States  Constitution, 
though  in  America  it  is  from  the  state  legislature,  if  then  in  session, 
that  the  application  for  protection  ought  to  come.  Australia  is 
right  in  her  variation,  because  in  her  States  the  legislature  acts 
through  the  executive.  Neither  provision  occurs  in  the  Constitu- 
tion of  Canada,  which  assigns  military  and  naval  defence  exclu- 
sively to  the  Dominion  government,  and  makes  itself  responsible 
for  the  maintenance  of  order  everywhere.  In  Switzerland  the 
management  of  the  army,  in  which  all  citizens  are  bound  to  serve, 
is  divided  between  cantons  and  confederation,  the  supreme  control 
remaining  with  the  latter  (Artt.  18-22).  The  confederation  is 
bound  to  protect  a  canton  against  invasion  and  disorders,  and  may 
even  itself  intervene  if  the  executive  of  the  canton  cannot  ask  it  on 
its  own  motion  (Artt.  16  and  17).  Australia,  as  we  have  seen, 
allows  the  States  to  maintain  a  force  with  the  consent  of  the  Com- 
monwealth; and  this  is  permitted  by  the  American  Constitution 
also. 

§  3.  The  Legislature  in  the  Australian  Common-wealth 

We  may  now  pass  on  to  consider  the  national  government,  the 
construction  whereof  occupies  by  far  the  greater  part  of  the  Con- 
stitution, which,  while  it  left  the  States  pretty  much  as  they  were, 
had  here  to  build  up  a  new  system  from  the  ground. 

The  first  point  to  be  examined  relates  to  the  limitations  imposed 


654  English  Historians 

on  the  national  government  as  against  the  citizens  generally,  since 
I  have  already  dealt  with  the  limitations  on  its  powers  as  against 
the  States.  Here  a  remarkable  divergence  from  the  American 
Constitution  is  disclosed.  When  that  instrument  was  enacted, 
the  keenest  suspicion  and  jealousy  was  felt  of  the  action  of  the 
government  to  be  established  under  it.  It  was  feared  that  Con- 
gress might  become  an  illiberal  oligarchy  and  the  President  a  new 
George  III.  Accordingly  great  pains  were  taken  to  debar  Congress 
from  doing  anything  which  could  infringe  the  primordial  human 
rights  of  the  citizen.  Some  restrictions  are  contained  in  the  original 
Constitution;  others  fill  the  first  nine  amendments  which  were 
passed  two  or  three  years  later,  as  a  part  of  the  arrangements  by 
which  the  acceptance  of  the  Constitution  was  secured.  And  down 
till  our  own  time  every  state  constitution  in  America  has  continued 
to  contain  a  similar  "Bill  of  Rights"  for  the  protection  of  the 
citizens  against  abuse  of  legislative  power.  The  English,  however, 
have  completely  forgotten  these  old  suspicions  which,  when  they 
did  exist,  attached  to  the  crown  and  not  to  the  legislature.  So 
when  Englishmen  in  Canada  or  Australia  enact  new  constitutions, 
they  take  no  heed  of  such  matters,  and  make  their  legislature  as  like 
the  omnipotent  Parliament  of  Britain  as  they  can.  The  Canadian 
Constitution  leaves  the  dominion  Parliament  unfettered  save  by 
the  direction  (sect.  54)  that  money  shall  not  be  appropriated  to  any 
purpose  that  has  not  been  recommended  to  the  House  of  Commons 
by  the  executive,  a  direction  embodying  English  practice,  and  now 
adopted  by  Australia  also.  And  the  Australian  Constitution 
contains  but  one  provision  which  recalls  the  old-fashioned  Bill  of 
Rights,  viz.,  that  which  forbids  the  Commonwealth  to  "make  any 
law  for  establishing  any  religion  or  for  imposing  any  religious  ob- 
servance or  for  prohibiting  the  free  exercise  of  any  religion."  The 
Swiss  Constitution,  influenced  by  French  and  American  models, 
is  in  this  respect  more  archaic,  for  it  imposes  a  series  of  disabilities 
on  its  legislature  in  the  interest  of  individual  freedom  (sectt.  39,  49, 
54-59).  This  diversity  of  attitude  between  the  English  on  the  one 
hand  and  both  the  Americans  and  the  Swiss  on  the  other  is  a 
curious  instance  of  the  way  in  which  usage  and  tradition  mould  a 
nation's  mind.  Parliament  was  for  so  long  a  time  the  protector 
of  Englishmen  against  an  arbitrary  executive  that  they  did  not 
form  the  habit  of  taking  precautions  against  the  abuse  of  the  powers 
of  the  legislature;  and  their  struggles  for  a  fuller  freedom  took  the 
form  of  making  Parliament  a  more  truly  popular  and  representative 
body,  not  that  of  restricting  its  authority. 


The  Australian  Constitution  655 

The  point  just  examined  is  one  which  arises  in  all  rigid  consti- 
tutions, whether  federal  or  unitary.  But  the  next  point  is  one 
with  which  only  federations  are  concerned ;  and  it  is  one  in  which 
all  the  great  federations  agree.  All  have  adopted  the  same  method 
of  providing  both  for  the  predominance  of  the  majority  of  the 
people  considered  as  one  nation,  and  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
rights  of  the  States  considered  as  distinct  communities.  The 
Americans  invented  this  method;  the  Swiss,  the  Canadians,  the 
Germans,  and  now  the  Australians  have  imitated  them.  This 
method  is  to  divide  the  legislature  into  two  houses,  using  one  to 
represent  the  whole  people  on  the  basis  of  numbers,  and  using 
the  other  to  represent  the  several  States  on  the  basis  (except  in 
Germany)  of  their  equality  as  autonomous  communities.  It  was 
this  device  that  made  federation  possible  in  the  United  States, 
for  the  smaller  States  would  not  have  foregone  their  independence 
in  reliance  upon  any  weaker  guarantee. 

The  Australian  scheme  provides  (sectt.  7-23)  for  an  Upper 
House  or  Senate  of  thirty-six  members,  six  from  each  State,  and 
a  House  of  Representatives  (sectt.  24-40)  of  seventy-five  members, 
elected  on  a  basis  of  population,  so  that  forty-nine  members  will 
come  from  the  two  large  States,  New  South  Wales  and  Victoria, — 
and  twenty-six  from  the  four  small  States.  No  original  State  is  ever 
to  have  less  than  five. 

The  equal  representation  of  the  six  original  States  is  always  to  be 
maintained,  but  the  number  of  senators  may  be  increased,  and 
when  new  States  come  to  be  formed,  the  Parliament  may  allot  to 
them  such  number  of  senators  as  it  thinks  fit.  Senators  sit  for 
six  years,  and  do  not  all  retire  at  the  same  time.  These  features 
are  taken  from  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  which,  as 
already  observed,  has  been  a  model  for  subsequent  federal  upper 
houses.  But  "there  are  remarkable  variations  in  the  Australian 
scheme. 

1.  In  the  United  States  each  newly  created  State  receives  as  a 
matter  of  right  its  two  senators.     In  Australia  the  Commonwealth 
may  allot  such  number  as  it  thinks  fit. 

2.  In  the  United  States  one-third  of  the  Senate  retires  every 
two  years.     In  Australia  one-half  retires  every  three  years. 

3.  In  the  United  States  the  president  of  the  Senate  is  the  Vice- 
President  of  the  United  States,  chosen  by  the  people.     In  Aus- 
tralia, the  Senate  is  to  choose  its  own  President. 

4.  In  the  United  States  the  quorum  is  one  more  than  a  half 
of  the  total  number;   in  Australia  one-third  of  the  total  number. 


656  English  Historians 

5.  In  the  United  States  the  legislatures  of  the  several  States 
elect  the  senators.     In  Australia  the  senators  are  elected  by  the 
people  of  the  State. 

This  last  point  is  one  of  great  interest.  Tocqueville,  writing  in 
1832,  attributed  (erroneously,  as  the  sequel  has  shown)  the  excel- 
lence of  the  American  Senate  to  the  method  of  election  by  the 
state  legislatures.  Since  his  days  the  American  Senate  has  declined , 
and  so  far  from  this  mode  of  election  having  tended  to  sustain  its 
character,  the  general,  though  not  unanimous,  opinion  of  the  wise 
in  America  deems  the  Senate  to  be  injured  by  it,  and  desires  a 
change  to  the  method  of  election  by  direct  popular  vote.  It  was 
partly  because  the  Australian  convention  had  become  aware  of  this 
tendency  of  American  opinion  that  they  rejected  the  existing  Amer- 
ican plan ;  nor  is  it  impossible  that  the  Americans  themselves  may 
alter  their  system,  which  gives  greater  opportunities  for  intrigue 
and  the  use  of  money  than  popular  election  would  be  likely  to 
afford.  In  Australia,  the  senators  are  in  the  first  instance  to  be 
elected  by  the  people,  each  State  voting  as  one  electorate,  but  this 
may  be  altered  (e.g.  to  a  system  of  district  elections)  by  the  Parlia- 
ment of  the  Commonwealth,  or  failing  its  action,  by  the  Parliament 
of  a  State.  It  will  be  interesting  to  see  what  experiments  are  tried 
and  how  they  work.  District  voting  may  give  different  results 
from  a  general  state  vote,  and  a  party  for  the  moment  dominant 
may  choose  the  plan  that  best  suits  it. 

6.  In  the  United  States  the  Senate  is  an  undying  body,  perpetu- 
allyrenewed  by  fresh  elections,  never  losing  more  than  one-third 
of  its  members  at  any  one  time.    In  Australia  the  Senate  may  be 
dissolved  in  case  a  deadlock  should  arise  between  it  and  the  House 
of  Representatives. 

The  Senate  is  the  sheet-anchor  of  the  four  small  States.  Com- 
manding a  majority  in  it,  they  have  consented  to  atquiesce  in  the 
great  preponderance  which  their  two  larger  neighbors  possess  in 
the  House  of  Representatives.  The  numbers  of  the  latter  House 
.  are  to  be  always  as  nearly  as  practicable  double  those  of  the  Senate, 
a  point  whose  importance  will  presently  appear. 

The  House  is  to  continue  for  three  years  (subject,  of  course,  to 
dissolution),  a  term  intermediate,  though  inclining  in  the  demo- 
cratic direction,  between  the  two  years  of  the  American  Congress 
and  the  seven  (practically  six)  years  of  the  British  House  of  Com- 
mons. The  Canadian  term  is  five  years.  Until  the  common- 
wealth Parliament  otherwise  provides,  the  electoral  suffrage  is  to 
be  (as  in  the  United  States)  the  suffrage  prescribed  by  state  law 


The  Australian  Constitution  657 

for  the  election  of  members  of  the  more  numerous  state  house, 
and  it  is  expressly  provided,  doubtless  with  a  view  to  the  fact  that 
women's  suffrage  already  exists  in  two  colonies,  that  no  law  shall 
prevent  a  state  voter  from  voting  at  commonwealth  elections. 
So  far  from  securing,  as  does  the  United  States  Constitution,  that 
no  person  shall  be  excluded  on  the  ground  of  race  from  the  suffrage, 
Australia  has  expressly  provided  that  persons  belonging  to  a  par- 
ticular race  may  be  excluded,  for  she  declares  (sect.  25)  that  in 
such  cases  the  excluded  race  is  not  to  be  reckoned  among  the  popu- 
lation of  the  State  for  the  purposes  of  an  allotment  of  represen- 
tatives. Plural  voting  is  forbidden.  The  quorum  of  members  is 
a  mean  between  the  inconveniently  large  quorum  (one-half)  of  the 
American,  and  the  very  small  one  (forty)  of  the  British  House. 
The  seat  of  any  senator  or  member  of  the  House  becomes  ipso 
facto  vacant  if  he  fails  (without  permission)  to  attend  any  session 
for  two  continuous  months.  No  person  having  any  pecuniary 
interest  in  any  agreement  with  the  public  service  (except  as  mem- 
ber of  an  incorporated  company  of  at  least  twenty-five  persons),  or 
holding  any  office  of  profit  under  the  crown,  can  sit  in  either 
house,  unless  he  be  a  minister  either  of  the  Commonwealth  or  of 
a  State.  The  exception  is  noteworthy,  not  only  because  it  is 
framed  with  a  view  to  the  establishment  of  Cabinet  government, 
but  also  because  it  implies  that  a  man  may,  contrary  to  American 
and  Canadian  usage,  be  at  the  same  time  both  an  executive  official 
of  a  State  and  also  a  member  of  the  federal  legislature.  It 
would  appear  that  women  are  eligible  to  membership  of  either 
house.  Every  senator  and  representative  is  to  receive  a  salary, 
fixed  for  the  present  at  £400  ($2000)  a  year. 

§  4.    The  Federal  Executive 

The  executive  is  to  consist  of  the  governor-general  and  the  min- 
isters. To  the  great  convenience  of  the  Australian  people,  the 
head  of  the  executive  does  not  need  to  be  elected  either  by  popular 
vote  (as  in  the  United  States)  or  by  the  Chambers,  as  in  France  and 
Switzerland.  He  is  nominated  by  the  British  crown,  and  holds 
office  so  long  as  the  crown  pleases,  receiving  a  salary  fixed,  for  the 
present  at  ^10,000  ($50,000)  a  year  (exactly  the  salary  of  the  Ameri- 
can President).  He  has  an  executive  council,  modelled  on  the 
British  Privy  Council  (though  the  name  Privy  Council  is  not  used 
as  it  is  in  the  Canadian  Constitution),  and  from  it  he  chooses  a 
number  of  ministers  (fixed  for  the  present  at  seven),  who  are  to 
2  r 


658  English  Historians 

administer  the  several  departments  of  the  public  service.  They 
must  be  members  of  one  or  other  House  of  Parliament  —  a 
remarkable  provision,  for  though  this  is  a  British  practice,  that 
practice  has  never  been  embodied  in  any  positive  rule.  As  the 
governor-general  is  only  a  constitutional  figurehead,  these  ministers 
will  in  fact  constitute  the  ruling  executive  of  the  Commonwealth. 

§  5.   The  Federal  High  Court 

The  judiciary  is  to  consist  in  the  first  instance  of  a  federal  high 
court  (containing  a  chief  justice  and  at  least  two  other  judges) 
capable  of  exercising  both  original  jurisdiction  in  certain  sets  of 
cases,  and  also  appellate  jurisdiction  not  only  from  single  federal 
judges  and  inferior  federal  courts,  but  also  from  the  supreme  courts 
of  the  States.  Power  is  taken  both  to  establish  lower  federal  courts 
and  to  invest  state  courts  with  federal  jurisdiction.  But  besides  this 
judiciary  proper,  there  is  created  a  second  court  for  dealing  with 
cases  relating  to  trade  and  commerce,  under  the  name  of  the 
Inter-State  Commission  (sect.  101).  This  remarkable  and  very 
important  institution  has  doubtless  been  suggested  by  the  United 
States  Inter-State  Commerce  Commission  created  by  Congress  some 
eighteen  years  ago  in  order  to  deal  with  railway  and  water  traffic 
between  the  States.  Its  functions  will  be  half-administrative,  half- 
judicial,  and  in  questions  of  pure  law  an  appeal  will  lie  from  it  to 
the  high  court,  while  a  guarantee  for  its  independence  is  found  in  the 
clause  which  declares  that  its  members  shall  not  be  removed  during 
their  seven  years'  term  of  office.  All  federal  judges  are  to  be 
appointed  by  the  governor-general,  that  is  to  say,  by  the  executive 
ministry.  All  trials  (on  indictment)  for  any  offence  against  the 
laws  of  the  Commonwealth  shall  be  by  jury,  and  held  in  the  State 
where  the  alleged  offence  was  committed.  The  judicial  establish- 
ments of  the  States  remain  unaffected,  and  the  judges  thereof 
will  continue  to  be  appointed  by  the  state  executives. 

In  determining  the  functions  of  the  high  court  there  arose  an 
important  question  which  seemed  for  a  moment  to  threaten  the 
whole  scheme  of  federation.  The  draft  constitution,  which  the 
convention  had  prepared  and  which  the  people  had  approved 
by  their  vote,  provided  that  questions  arising  on  the  interpretation 
of  the  Constitution  as  to  the  respective  limits  of  the  powers  of  the 
Commonwealth  and  of  the  States,  or  as  to  the  respective  limits  of 
the  constitutional  powers  of  any  two  or  more  States,  should  be 
adjudicated  upon  by  the  high  court  of  the  Commonwealth,  and 


The  Australian  Constitution  659 

that  no  appeal  should  lie  from  its  decision  to  the  Queen  in  council 
(i.e.  to  the  judicial  committee  of  the  Privy  Council  in  England, 
which  is  the  Supreme  Court  of  Appeal  from  the  British  colonies  and 
India),  "unless  the  public  interests  of  some  part  of  her  Majesty's 
dominions,  other  than  the  Commonwealth  or  a  State,  are  involved." 
When  the  draft  reached  England  to  be  embodied  in  a  bill,  the 
British  government  took  exception  to  this  provision  as  tending  to 
weaken  the  tie  between  the  mother  country  and  the  colonies. 
There  were  many  in  England  who  thought  that  it  was  not  in  the 
interest  of  Australia  herself  that  she  should  lose,  in  questions 
which  might  involve  political  feeling  and  be  complicated  with  party 
issues,  the  benefit  of  having  a  determination  of  such  questions  by  an 
authority  absolutely  impartial  and  unconnected  with  her  domestic 
interests  and  passions.  How  much  better  (they  argued)  would  it 
have  been  for  the  United  States  at  some  critical  moments  could 
they  have  had  constitutional  disputes  adjudicated  on  by  a  tribunal 
above  all  suspicion  of  sectional  or  party  bias,  since  it  would  have 
represented  the  pure  essence  of  legal  wisdom,  an  unimpeachable 
devotion  to  legal  truth ! 

To  this  the  Australians  replied  that  the  experience  of  the  United 
States  had  shown  that  in  constitutional  questions  it  was  sometimes 
right  and  necessary  to  have  regard  to  the  actual  conditions  and 
needs  of  the  nation;  that  constitutional  questions  were  in  so  far 
political  that  where  legal  considerations  were  nearly  balanced,  the 
view  ought  to  be  preferred  which  an  enlightened  regard  for  the 
welfare  of  the  nation  suggested;  that  a  court  sitting  in  England 
and  knowing  little  of  Australia  would  be  unable  to  appreciate  all 
the  bearings  of  a  constitutional  question,  and  might,  in  taking  a 
purely  technical  and  possibly  too  literal  a  view  of  the  Constitution, 
give  to  the  Constitution  a  rigidity  which  would  check  its  legitimate 
expansion  and  aggravate  internal  strife.  Australia  must  —  so  they 
pursued  —  be  mistress  of  her  own  destinies,  and  as  it  is  she  that  had 
framed  and  procured  the  enactment  of  this  Constitution,  so  by  her 
ought  the  responsibility  to  be  borne  of  working  it  on  its  judicial  as 
well  as  its  executive  and  legislative  side.  Not  only  was  this  better 
for  Australia  herself,  but  it  would  be  more  conducive  to  the  main- 
tenance of  the  connection  between  the  Commonwealth  and  the 
mother  country. 

After  some  wavering,  the  British  government,  perceiving  the 
risk  of  offending  Australian  sentiment,  gave  way.  They  dropped 
in  committee  of  the  House  of  Commons  the  alteration  which  they 
had  introduced  into  the  Australian  draft,  substituting  for  it  an 


66o  English  Historians 

amendment  which,  while  slightly  varying  the  original  terms  of  the 
draft,  practically  conceded  the  point  for  which  the  Australian 
delegates,  sent  to  England  to  assist  in  passing  the  measure,  had 
contended.  The  act  as  passed  provides  that  no  appeal  shall  lie 
to  the  crown  in  council  upon  the  constitutional  questions  above- 
mentioned  unless  the  high  court  itself  shall,  being  satisfied  that  the 
question  is  one  which  ought  to  be  determined  by  the  Privy  Council, 
certify  to  that  effect.  In  all  other  such  cases  its  judgment  will  be 
final. 

Appeals  to  the  Privy  Council  in  questions  other  than  consti- 
tutional will  continue  to  lie  from  the  supreme  courts  of  the  States 
(with  the  alternative  of  an  appeal  to  the  high  court)  and  from  the  high 
court  itself,  when  special  leave  is  given  by  the  Privy  Council.  The 
commonwealth  Parliament  may  limit  the  matters  in  which  such 
leave  may  be  asked,  but  the  laws  imposing  such  limitations  are 
to  be  reserved  for  the  pleasure  of  the  crown. 

The  scheme  of  judicature  above  outlined  follows  in  the  main  the 
model  contained  in  the  American  Constitution.  It  does  not  draw 
the  line  between  state  and  federal  matters  and  courts  so  sharply, 
for  appeals  are  to  lie  from  state  courts  in  all  matters  alike,  and 
state  courts  may  receive  jurisdiction  in  federal  matters.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  is  more  comformable  to  principle  than  either  the 
Canadian  plan,  which  provides  no  federal  courts  save  the  supreme 
court  and  gives  the  appointment  of  all  judges  alike  to  the  Dominion 
government,  or  the  Swiss  plan,  which  refers  questions  of  conflict 
between  the  nation  and  the  cantons,  or  as  to  the  constitutionality 
of  federal  laws,  not  to  the  judiciary  at  all,  but  to  the  federal  legis- 
lature. Broadly  speaking,  the  Australian  high  court  will  have  to 
fill  such  a  place  and  discharge  such  functions  as  have  been  filled 
and  discharged  in  America  by  that  exalted  tribunal  which  Chief 
Justice  John  Marshall  and  other  great  legal  luminaries  have  made 
illustrious.  In  working  out  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  by 
an  expansive  interpretation,  cautious  but  large-minded,  it  may 
render  to  Australia  services  not  unworthy  to  be  compared  with 
those  which  America  has  gratefully  recognized. 

Now  let  us  see  how  this  frame  of  government,  which  I  have 
briefly  outlined  in  its  salient  features,  is  intended  to  work. 

Its  essence  lies  in  a  matter  which  is  not  indicated  by  any  express 
provision,  the  dependence  of  the  executive  upon  the  legislature. 
Herein  it  differs  fundamentally  from  the  American  and  Swiss 
systems.  It  reproduces  the  English  system  of  what  is  called 
Cabinet  or  responsible  government ;  that  is  to  say,  a  government 


The  Australian  Constitution  66 1 

in  which  the  executive  instead  of  being,  as  in  America,  an  indepen- 
dent authority,  directly  created  by  the  people  and  amenable  to  the 
people  only,  is  created  by  and  responsible  to  the  legislature.  As  and 
when  the  British  colonies  respectively  obtained  self-governing 
institutions,  each  of  them  adopted  this  scheme,  since  it  was  the 
one  familiar  to  them  at  home;  and  to  it  they  seem  all  determined 
to  adhere. 

Its  distinctive  features  are  these :  — 

The  nominal  head  of  the  executive,  in  Britain  the  crown,  in 
Australia  the  governor-general  as  representing  the  crown,  is 
permanent,  and  is  not  responsible  to  the  legislature,  because  he 
acts  not  on  his  own  views,  but  upon  the  advice  of  his  ministers. 

The  ministers  are  responsible  to  the  legislature  which  virtually 
chooses  them,  and  they  depend  upon  its  confidence  for  their  con- 
tinuance in  office. 

The  ministers  are,  however,  not  wholly  at  the  mercy  of  the  legis- 
lature, because  they  may  dissolve  it,  that  is  to  say,  may  appeal  to 
the  people,  in  the  hope  that  the  people  will  elect  a  new  legislature 
which  will  support  them.  This  kind  of  government  accordingly 
rests  on  a  balance  of  three  authorities,  —  the  executive,  the  legislat  ure, 
and  the  people,  the  people  being  a  sort  of  arbiter  between  ministry 
and  Parliament.  As  the  ministry  can  at  any  moment  appeal  to  the 
people,  the  threat  of  appealing  puts  pressure  upon  the  Parliament, 
and  keeps  a  majority  cohesive.  In  the  existence  of  this  power  of 
sudden  dissolution  there  lies  a  marked  difference  from  the  Ameri- 
can scheme,  which  some  one  has  called  astronomical,  because 
the  feur  years'  term  of  office  of  the  executive  and  the  two  years' 
term  of  the  legislature  are  both  fixed  by  the  earth's  course  round  the 
sun. 

I  have  spoken  of  the  legislature  as  the  authority  to  which  the 
ministry  is  responsible.  But  what  is  the  legislature  ?  In  England, 
although  Parliament  consists  of  two  houses,  the  minister-making 
power  resides  solely  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Being  elective, 
the  House  of  Commons  has  behind  it  the  moral  weight  of  the  people 
and  the  prestige  of  many  victories.  Being  the  holder  of  the  purse, 
it  has  the  legal  machinery  for  giving  effect  to  its  will,  since  without 
supplies  administration  cannot  be  carried  on.  Accordingly, 
though  the  existence  of  two  often  discordant  houses  may  arrest 
or  modify  legislation  in  Britain,  it  does  not  affect  the  executive 
conduct  of  affairs,  save  on  the  rare  occasions  when  immediate 
legislation  is  deemed  indispensable  by  the  executive.  The  same 
remark  applies  to  Canada.  There  also  one  finds  two  houses,  but 


662  English  Historians 

the  Senate,  being  a  nominated  and  not  a  representative  body,  holds 
an  entirely  secondary  place.  The  ministry  may  disregard  a  vote 
of  want  of  confidence  passed  by  it,  just  as  in  England  they  disregard 
an  adverse  vote  of  the  House  of  Lords.  In  Australia,  however, 
things  will  be  quite  different.  There  the  Senate  has  been  con- 
stituted as  a  representative  body,  elected  by  the  peoples  of  the 
States ;  and  as  the  protector  of  the  rights  and  interests  of  the  States 
it  holds  functions  of  the  highest  importance.  Its  powers  (save  in 
one  point  to  be  presently  mentioned)  are  the  same  as  those  of  the 
House.  In  whom,  then,  does  the  power  of  making  and  unmaking 
ministries  reside?  Wherever  one  finds  two  assemblies,  one  finds 
them  naturally  tending  to  differ;  and  this  will  be  particularly 
likely  to  occur  where,  as  in  Australia,  they  are  constructed  by 
different  modes  of  election.  Suppose  a  vote  of  no  confidence  in  a 
particular  ministry  is  carried  in  one  house  and  followed  by  a  vote 
of  confidence  passed  in  the  other.  Is  the  ministry  to  resign  be- 
cause one  house  will  not  support  it?  It  retains  the  confidence 
of  the  other;  and  if  it  does  resign,  and  a  new  ministry  comes  in, 
the  house  which  supported  it  may  pass  a  vote  of  no  confidence  in 
those  who  have  succeeded  it. 

The  problem  is  one  which  cannot  arise  either  under  the  English 
or  under  the  American  system.  Not  under  the  English,  because 
the  two  houses  are  not  coordinate,  the  House  of  Commons  being 
much  the  stronger.  Not  under  the  American,  because,  although 
the  houses  are  coordinate,  neither  house  has  the  power  of  dis- 
placing the  President  or  his  ministers.  It  is  therefore  a  new  prob- 
lem, and  one  which  directly  results  from  the  attempt  to  combine 
features  of  both  schemes,  the  Cabinet  system  of  England  and  the 
coordinate  Senate,  strong  because  it  represents  the  States,  which 
a  federal  system  prescribes. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Jenks,  History  of  the  Australasian  Colonies.  Turner,  A  History  of  the 
Colony  of  Victoria.  Beach,  The  Australian  Federal  Constitution,  in  the 
Political  Science  Quarterly,  Vol.  XIV,  pp.  663  ff. 


INDEX 


/Ethelbert,  of  Kent,  extent  of  his  empire, 
13 ;  accepts  Christianity,  15. 

Aids,  77. 

Alfred  the  Great,  state  of  England  during 
his  reign,  30  If.;  seeks  learned  men, 
31;  Asser  in  his  service,  32;  develop- 
ment of  English  prose  under,  33 ;  and 
the  Chronicle,  35. 

Anglo-Saxon  Conquest,  importance  of 
exaggerated,  i ;  theories  of,  2 ;  argu- 
ment for  Teutonic  theory  of,  3 ;  process 
of,  8;  results  of,  10;  completion  of,  12. 

Anglo-Saxons,  contrasted  with  Franks, 
7;  civilization  of,  10;  contests  among, 
12  ff. ;  conversion  of,  13  ff. 

Ashley,  on  the  mediaeval  gilds,  169  ff. 

Asser,  invited  by  Alfred  to  Wessex,  32; 
labors  at  Alfred's  court,  33. 

Augustine,  landing  in  England,  13-14. 

Australia,  land  and  people  of,  645  ff. ; 
position  of  the  state  in  Constitution  of, 
649  ff. ;  federal  legislature  in,  653  ff. ; 
fedei  al  executive  in,  657 ;  the  federal 
high  court  of,  658  ff. 

Baeda,  his  life,  23,  24;  work,  24,  25; 
Alfred's  translations,  36. 

Bagehot,  on  the  Cabinet,  594  ff. 

Becket,  as  archbishop,  96  ff. ;  first  dis- 
pute with  Henry  II,  98;  and  the 
Church-State  dispute,  99 ;  and  the  Con- 
stitutions of  Clarendon,  99,  101 ;  flight 
of,  101 ;  return  to  England  and  death, 
io6ff. 

Bengal,  British  in,  447. 

Berlin  Decree,  528. 

Bible,  Wycliffe  and  the,  230 ;  Puritanism 
and  the,  321. 

Bishops,  dioceses  of,  created,  21 ;  pri- 
macy of  Canterbury,  22 ;  election  of, 
206. 


Boroughs,  see  Towns. 

Britain,   Roman   villa  in,  3;  contrasted 

with  Gaul,  6;  effects   of  Roman    rule 

on,  7-9. 
Britons,  contest  with  German   invaders, 

3-8 ;  contrasted  with  Gauls,  7. 
Bryce,   on   the  Australian  Constitution, 

645  ff- 

Cabinet,  prime  minister  in,  594 ;  princi- 
pal features  of,  596;  compared  with 
presidential  system,  598;  relation  to 
political  education  of  the  nation,  600; 
relation  to  the  press,  602;  compared 
with  weakness  of  presidential  system, 
602  ff. 

Calcutta,  Black  Hole  of,  447. 

Calvinism,  contrasted  with  Lutheranism, 
308;  and  Puritanism,  325. 

Canada,  relative  strength  of  French  in, 
452;  Montcalm  in,  453;  Pitt's  scheme 
for  the  conquest  of,  456;  arrival  of 
Wolfe  in,  457;  Wolfe's  campaign  in, 

459- 
Capitalists,  rise  of,  513;  philosophy  of, 

5r5.  6*4- 

Catholics,  on  the  Continent  in  the  six- 
teenth century,  310;  James  I  and,  335; 
disabilities  0,399  ff.;  James  II  and, 
406  ff . ;  relation  of,  to  colonization, 426. 

Charles  I,  signs  Petition  of  Right,  347; 
contest  with  Parliament,  347  ff. ;  dis- 
solution of  Parliament  in  1629,  353; 
and  the  Declaration  of  Sports,  362; 
personal  government  of,  364;  breaks 
with  the  Long  Parliament,  371;  trial 
and  condemnation  of,  373  ff. ;  char- 
acter of,  375  ff. 

Christianity,  in  Britain,  8,  9;  introduc- 
tion into  England,  12,  15;  conversion 
of  Northumberland,  15 ;  work  of  the 


663 


664 


Index 


Irish  missionaries,  17,  18;  see  Refor- 
mation, Puritanism,  and  Catholics. 

Chronicle,  the  Old  English,  origin  of, 
35;  Swithun's  work  on,  36;  expan- 
sion of,  under  Alfred,  36. 

Church,  organization  by  Theodore,  21  ff. ; 
controversy  over  powers  of,  under 
Henry  11,99  ff-5  m  tne  Middle  Agest 
204  ff. ;  as  an  organization,  205;  elec- 
tion of  bishops,  206;  and  the  pope, 
208;  convocations,  212;  legislation 
relating  to,  214;  jurisdiction  of,  216; 
and  Wycliffe,  221  ff. ;  decline  of  power, 
246  ff. ;  in  the  fifteenth  century,  247; 
Froude's  view  of,  in  sixteenth  century, 
248  ff. ;  Henry  VII  and,  249. 

Church,  The  Anglican,  the  Elizabethan 
establishment,  295  ff. ;  and  Laud, 
355  ff. ;  see  Puritanism ;  monopoly  of 
offices  by  members  of,  399  ff. ;  and 
non-conformists,  402;  and  contest 
with  James  II,  404  ff. 

Church,  Roman,  missionaries  sent  to 
England  by,  13;  triumph  of,  at 
Whitby,  20,  21 ;  Theodore  sent  to 
England  by,  21 ;  Cnut's  visit  to,  44 ; 
sanctions  Norman  Conquest,  61 ;  its 
jurisdiction,  204;  temporal  superior- 
ity of,  206 ;  relation  of,  to  ecclesiastical 
appointments,  208 ;  English  legisla- 
tion against,  211;  Wycliffe 's  attitude 
toward,  229;  English  view  of,  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  251;  Parliament 
and  the  breach  with,  255  ff. ;  Cran- 
mer  and,  281  ff.;  Elizabethan 
break  with,  297  ff. ;  reform  of,  313  ; 
the  Council  of  Trent  and,  314;  char- 
acter of,  after  1564,317;  James  II  and, 
404  ff. 

Clarendon,  Constitutions  of,  99  ff. ; 
Assize  of,  102. 

Clarke,  on  labor  politics,  608  ff. 

Classes,  earls  and  barons,  78  ff. ;  knights, 
80  ff. ;  the  unfree,  81  ff. ;  industrial, 
513 ;  see  Labor. 

Clergy,  see  Church. 

Cnut,  secures  the  throne,  38, 39 ;  destroys 
rivals,  39;  character  of  his  rule,  41, 
44;  his  military  system,  43;  favors 
the  Church,  43 ;  journey  to  Rome,  44, 
letter  to  his  people,  44. 


Cobdenism,  614  ff. 

Colonization,  advance  of,  424 ;  advan- 
tages of,  424;  political  aims  in,  425; 
religious  motive  in,  427  ff. ;  as  a  source 
of  gain,  430 ;  and  settlement,  430. 

Continental  System,  The,  520  ff. ;  origin 
of,  520-523 ;  theory  of,  523 ;  English 
argument  for,  525;  Napoleon  and, 
527  ff. ;  development  of,  528  ff. ; 
economic  justification  for  English 
view  of,  532 ;  evasion  of,  535. 

Corbett,  on  Drake,  434  ff. 

County,  representation  in  Parliament,  128. 

Cranmer,  Thomas,  appeal  to  a  general 
council,  281  ff. ;  his  degradation,  283 ; 
first  recantation,  284;  renewed  sub- 
missions, 286 ;  preparations  for  humili- 
ation of,  287  ;  the  real  recantation.  288 ; 
the  sixth  confession,  289;  the  seventh 
recantation,  290;  the  last  day  of,  291  ff. 

Cromwell,  Oliver,  and  the  death  warrant 
of  Charles  I,  374;  his  dissolution  of 
the  Long  Parliament,  381  ff. ;  criticism 
of  his  action,  387;  Guizot's  view  of, 

389- 

Cromwell,  Thomas,  the  King's  chief 
secretary,  264;  as  vicar  general,  265; 
and  Fisher,  267 ;  and  the  monasteries, 
269  ff. 

Cunningham,  on  motives  for  coloniza- 
tion, 423  ff. ;  on  the  industrial  revolu- 
tion, 505  ff. 


Danes,  their   havoc  in  England,  30  ff. ; 

renewed   attempts  of,  38;    victory  of, 

under  Cnut,  38. 

Declaration  of  Right,  formulated,  417  ff. 
Dispensing    power,    156;    exercise    by 

James  II,  404  ff. 
Disraeli,  in  opposition  to  Gladstone,  566; 

as  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  572 ; 

introduces  Parliamentary  reform,  573; 

triumph  of,  574. 
Dissent,  see  Nonconformists. 
Dixon,  on  the   breach  with    Rome  and 

Elizabethan  settlement,  255  ff.,  295  ff. 
Drake,  Sir  Francis,  his  circumnavigation 

of  the  globe,  434  ff. ;  raids  Spanish  ship- 
ping. 434    ft-:    s:ll's    northward,   440; 

crosses  the  Pacific,  440  ff. 


Index 


665 


Earls  and  barons,  legal  position  of,  78  ff. 
Egbert,    at    Charlemagne's    court,    27 ; 

supremacy  over  England,  28. 
Elizabeth,  first  Parliament  of,  295 ;  and 

English      insularity,      307;     religious 

policy,  325. 

Erasmus,  writes  Praise  of  Folly,  231. 
Escheat,  77. 

Feudalism,  not  retrogression,  4,  5;  ele- 
ments of,  74  ff. ;  and  military  system, 
74;  and  land  tenure,  74;  legal  inci- 
dents of,  76;  abolition  of  incidents  of, 
396. 

Fisher,  trial  and  execution  of,  267. 

France,  commercial  rivalry  with  England, 
520  ff. 

Franks  and  Anglo-Saxons  contrasted,  7. 

Freeholder,  159;  see  Manor. 

Freeman,  on  the  Witenagem6t,  48  ff. ; 
on  Norman  Conquest,  61  ff. 

Froude,  on  the  eve  of  the  Reformation, 
246  ff. 

Gairdner,  on  the  Church  after  the  breach 
with  Rome,  264  ff. 

Gardiner,  on  the  Parliamentary  crisis  of 
1629,  347  ff. ;  on  Laud,  355  ff. ;  on  the 
Long  Parliament,  364  ff. ;  on  the  Puri- 
tan Revolution,  373  ff. 

Gasquet,  on  the  origin  of  the  doctrinal 
revolt,  274  ff. 

Gaul,  a\.d  Britain  contrasted,  6. 

George  III,  personal  government  of,  492 
ff. ;  uses  his  friends,  493 ;  relations  to 
Chatham,  494  ;  government  through 
Lord  North,  496  ff. ;  failure  of  his  per- 
sonal government.  498 ;  protest  against 
his  intervention,  500. 

Gild,  Craft,  character  of,  175;  relation  to 
Merchant  Gild,  176  ff . ;  early  gilds, 
J77I  growth  of,  180;  struggle  for  privi- 
leges, 179;  internal  organization  of, 
181. 

Gild,  Merchant,  character  of,  171;  origin 
of,  171  ff. ;  membership  in,  172  ;  regula- 
tions of,  174;  relation  to  Craft  Gild, 

175- 

Gladstone  introduces  Reform  Bill,  567; 
debates  with  Lowe,  569 ;  amends  Dis- 


raeli's measure,  573;  introduces  new 
reform  bill  in  1884,  583 ;  and  the  House 
of  Lords,  587  ;  writes  to  Lord  Tennyson, 
587  ;  correspondence  of,  with  the  Queen, 
589  ;  negotiates  with  opposition,  592. 

Green,  J.  R.,  on  adoption  of  Christianity 
and  unification  of  England,  12  ff.  ;  on 
Alfred,  30  ff. ;  on  Puritanism,  321  ff. 

Green,  Mrs.  J.  R.,  on  town  life  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  185  ff. 

Hales,  the  case  of,  406. 

Hallam,  on  restoration  of  1660,  391  ff. 

Henry  II,  first  dispute  with  Becket,  98; 
attitude  toward  powers  of  clergy, 
99  ff . ;  Constitutions  of  Clarendon,  99; 
Assize  of  Clarendon,  102;  judicial  re- 
forms, 104;  inquest  of  sheriffs,  105; 
character  of  his  rule,  108. 

Henry  VIII,  and  ecclesiastical  training, 
250  ff. ;  motives  of,  in  divorce  con- 
troversy, 252 ;  policy  of  State,  253 ; 
and  Parliament,  255  ;  as  supreme  head 
of  the  Church,  261 ;  rejoices  on  death 
of  Catherine,  273. 

Hobson,  on  imperialism,  623  ff. 

Hunter,  on  the  Indian  Mutiny,  638  ft 

Impeachment,     instances     of,    144;     of 

Strafford,  364  ff. 
Imperialism,    economic    argument    for, 

624;  in  America,  626;  in  Europe,  628; 

overproduction   as   basis   of,  630;  an 

alternative  to,  632;  social  reform  and, 

634- 

India,  steps  in  rise  of  British  dominion 
in,  443,  444;  explanation  of  easy  con- 
quest of,  444  ff. ;  early  European  views 
of,  446;  the  British  in  Bengal,  447;  the 
Black  Hole  of  Calcutta,  447 ;  Clive  and 
the  battle  of  Plnssey,  448 ;  native 
armies  of,  449;  Mutiny  of  1857  in,  638 
ff . ;  causes  of  the  Mutiny  in,  639; 
course  and  results  of  Mutiny  in,  640  ff. 

Indulgence,  Declaration  of,  410. 

Industry,  in  the  Middle  Ages,  see  Gild; 
the  great  revolution  in,  505  ff. ;  rea- 
sons for  English  leadership  in.  507 ; 
regulative  policy  in,  508;  character  of 
changes  in,  509  ff.  ;  the  Manchester 


666 


Index 


view  of,  515;  and  creation  of  classes, 
511-514;  the  textile,  516  ff. 

Inquest  of  sheriffs,  105. 

Ireland,  Christianity  in,  17;  St.  Patrick 
in,  18;  plantations  in,  425,  431;  repre- 
sentation of,  in  Parliament,  542. 

James  I,  accession  of,  331  ff. ;  character 
of,  333;  and  the  Millenary  Petition, 
335 ;  at  the  Hampton  Court  Conference, 
336;  and  Parliament,  343;  and  un- 
parliamentary taxation,  345. 

James  II,  character  of,  404;  coerces 
courts,  405 ;  employs  Catholics,  406 ; 
declares  indulgence,  410;  and  the 
protest  of  the  bishops,  413 ;  flight  to 
France,  417. 

Kingship,  origin,  10;  elective,  52  ff. ; 
succession  to,  54;  control  by  Parlia- 
ment, 140  ff. ;  dispensing  power,  156 ; 
prerogatives  of,  404. 

Knight,  fee  of,  75;  position  of,  before 
the  law,  80. 

Labor,  effects  of  machinery  on,  511 ;  in 
politics,  608  ff. ;  formation  of  labor 
parties,  608 ;  and  state  interference, 
612,  615;  and  Chartism,  614;  and 
Cobdenism,  614. 

Laisser-faire,  policy  of,6io ;  criticised,6i2. 

Lappenberg,  on  Cnut,  38  ff. 

Laud,  character  of,  355 ;  and  ecclesiasti- 
cal discipline,  356 ;  and  Church  archi- 
tecture, 358 ;  dislike  of  the  Puritan 
Sabbath,  359 ;  and  the  Declaration  of 
Sports,  362. 

Lecky,  on  Methodism,  478  ff. 

Lords,  House  of,  see  Parliament. 

Lutheranism,  in  England,  276;  con- 
trasted with  Calvinism,  308. 

Lyall,  on  British  dominion  in  India, 
443  & 

Macaulay,  on  James  II  and  the  Whig 
revolution,  404  ff. 

McKechnie,  on  Magna  Carta,  no  ff. 

Magna  Carta,  former  viewrs  of,  no;  the 
term  "freemen"  in,  na;  the  enforce- 
ment of,  113;  relation  to  the  clnsses, 


114;  as  an  historic  landmark,  118; 
merits  of,  119;  exaggerations  of,  xao; 
value  to  later  generations,  121. 

Mahon,  Lord,  on  conquest  of  Canada, 
452  ff. 

Maitland,  on  the  Anglo-Saxon  Conquest, 
I  ff. ;  on  the  growth  of  the  manor, 
158  ff. 

Manor,  growth  of,  158  ff. ;  early  English, 
3,  4;  thirteenth-century  description  of, 
158;  conservatism  in,  160;  manage- 
ment of,  161  ff. ;  accounts  of,  162  ff. ; 
at  the  close  of  the  fourteenth  century, 
164  ft;  in  the  fifteenth  century,  166; 
summary  of  development  of,  167. 

May,  on  George  Ill's  personal  govern- 
ment, 492  ff. 

Mercia,  rise  under  OfTa,  25 ;  code  of  laws 
for,  26 ;  relations  with  Wesscx,  26  ff. 

Methodism,  origin  at  Oxford,  480;  mis- 
sionaries of,  482  ff. ;  lay  preachers  of, 
484;  opposition  to,  485;  and  worldly 
things,  486. 

Ministers,  control  of,  140;  see  Cabinet. 

Moghul,  see  India. 

Monasteries,  dissolution  of,  269  ff. 

Monks,  Wycliffe  on,  228;  execution  of 
the  Charterhouse,  264;  the  passing  of 
the,  297. 

More,  Sir  Thomas,  and  the  Utopia,  237 ; 
trial  and  execution  of,  267. 

Morley,  on  Cromwell,  381  ff. ;  on  Wai- 
pole,  466  ff. ;  on  Reform  Bill  of  1884, 
582  ff. 

Mortmain  act,  214. 


Napoleon,  and  the  Continental  System, 
521  ff. 

New  learning,  the,  231  ff. 

Nonconformists,  see  Puritanism ;  reli- 
gious disabilities  of,  399  ff. 

Norman  Conquest,  formal  completion 
of,  71;  nature  of,  73.  74:  effect  on 
English  political  development,  73  ff. 

North,   Lord,  government    for    George 

HI,  496  ff.;  fall  of.  502. 
i  Northumbria,    supremacy   and  conver- 
sion of,  15 ;  greatness  of,  under  Ead- 
wine,  16;  Irish  missionaries  in,  17  ff.; 
as  the  diocese  of  York,  ax. 


Index 


667 


Papacy,  see  Church  of  Rome. 

Parliament,  origin  of,  124  ff. ;  classes 
represented  in,  126 ;  county  representa- 
tion in,  128 ;  borough  representation, 
131 ;  methods  of  summoning,  132;  leg- 
islative power,  134;  and  taxation,  137, 
145 ;  control  of  royal  ministers,  140  ff. ; 
impeachment  of  ministers,  144;  peti- 
tions king,  147;  enforcement  of  peti- 
tions, 147;  legislation  by  statute,  152 
ff. ;  and  the  breach  with  Rome,  255  ff. ; 
and  the  Elizabethan  settlement,  295  ff. ; 
character  of,  in  the  seventeenth  century, 
339  ff. ;  contest  of,  with  James  I,  343 
ff. ;  and  taxation  under  James  I,  345; 
Parliamentary  crisis  of  1629,  347  ft". ; 
resolutions  of,  in  1629,  353;  see  the 
Long  Parliament ;  and  the  restoration 
of  1660,  391  ff. ;  formulates  the  Declar- 
ation of  Right,  417  ff. ;  at  the  opening 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  538  ff.;  con- 
ditions of  representation  in,  540;  power 
of  peers  in,  541;  representation  of 
Scotland  and  Ireland  in,  542;  borough 
representation  in,  544;  bribery  in  con- 
nection with,  545;  and  the  spoils  of 
office,  547. 

Parliament,  the  Long,  its  position  of 
control,  364;  the  Triennial  Act  and 
the  impeachment  of  Strafford,  365  ;  the 
act  against  dissolution,  366;  additional 
constitutional  restrictions,  367;  the  re- 
ligious parties  in,  368  ff. ;  break  with 
king  over  the  militia  ordinance,  371 ; 
dissolution  of,  381  ff. 

Parliamentary  reform  (1832),  agitation 
for,  549;  introduction  of  bill  for,  549; 
debate  on  the  bill  for,  550;  defeat  of 
government  and  new  election  on,  551 
ff. ;  defeated  by  House  of  Lords,  557; 
Macaulay's  speech  on,  557;  the  third 
bill  for,  559;  failure  of  the  Lords  to 
defeat,  560;  triumph  of,  564. 

Parliamentary  reform  (1867),  Glad- 
stone's measure  for,  567 ;  opposition 
to,  565,  568  ;  the  Gladstone-Lowe  de- 
bate on,  569;  Disraeli's  measure  of, 
573;  amendments  on,  573;  radical 
proposals  for,  575;  in  the  House  of 
Lords,  579;  passage  of  bill  for,  581. 

Parliamentary    reform      (1884),     Glad- 


stone's new  measure  for,  583 ;  stoppage 
of,  by  House  of  Lords,  584;  agitation 
through  the  country  lor,  585 ;  negotia- 
tions over,  between  Liberals  and  Con- 
servatives, 587  ft'.;  reintroduction  of 
bill  for,  591  ;  compromise  on,  592. 

Parties,  see  Parliament. 

Paul,  on  Reform  Bill  of  1867,  566  ff. 

Petition,  reception  of,  by  king,  147; 
evasion  of,  146;  and  legislation,  148; 
and  statute,  151;  bill,  substitute  for, 
153- 

Pitt,  Lord  Chatham,  and  conquest  of 
Canada,  456;  and  party  government, 
494 ;  his  Parliamentary  policy,  495 ; 
compared  with  Walpole,  468. 

Plassey,  battle  of,  448. 

Pollard,  on  Cranmer,  281  ff. 

Pollock  and  Maitland,  on  classes  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  78  ff. 

Pope,  see  Church  of  Rome. 

Prcemunire,  statute  of,  211. 

Praise  of  Folly,  attack  on  grammarians 
and  scholasticism,  232;  on  scholastic 
theology,  233 ;  on  princes  and  pope, 

235- 

Protestantism,  see  Reformation. 

Puritanism,  relation  to  Biblical  literature, 
321;  and  Calvinism,  325;  repression 
of,  by  the  government,  326,  329;  and 
Independency,  328 ;  and  the  Pilgrim 
fathers,  329;  James  I  and,  335  ff. ; 
silenced  under  James  I,  338;  and 
the  Sabbath,  359;  expulsion  of,  under 
Charles  II,  402. 

Quebec,  situation  of,  458  ;  fall  of,  459  ff. 

Reformation,  the  new  learning,  231  ff., 
246  ff. ;  Wolsey  as  reformer,  251 ;  act 
relating  to  annates,  bulls,  and  episco- 
pal elections,  256;  curtailment  of 
papal  revenues,  257  ;  withdrawal  from 
jurisdiction  of  Rome,  258  ;  submission 
of  the  clergy,  260;  royal  supremacy, 
261 ;  repression  of  Catholics,  264  ff. ; 
destruction  of  monasteries,  269;  rela- 
tion to  Lollardry,  274;  influence  of 
Lutheran  teachings,  276;  growth  and 
character  of  Protestant  literature, 
277  ff. ;  execution  of  Cranmer,  281  ff. ; 


668 


Index 


the  Acts  of  Supremacy  and  Uni- 
formity, 396  ff. ;  Catholic  arguments 
against  the  Elizabethan  settlement, 
302  ff. ;  relation  of  Protestantism  and 
Catholicism  on  the  Continent,  308  ff. ; 
and  the  Catholic  reaction,  313 ff.;  see 
Puritanism. 

Reformation,  the  Counter-,  310  ff. 

Relief,  76. 

Representation,  see  Parliament. 

Restoration,  the  declaration  from 
Breda,  392;  punishment  of  the  revolu- 
tionists, 342;  adjustment  of  land 
claims,  394 ;  disbandment  of  the  armyi 
398;  establishment  of  Anglican  pre- 
dominance, 399. 

Revolution  of  1688,  causes  of,  404  ff. ; 
landing  of  William,  417;  discussion  of 
constitutional  principles  in  Parliament, 
417 ;  formulation  of  the  Declaration  of 
Right,  419;  Proclamation  of  William 
and  Mary,  421. 

Russell,  Lord  John,  and  Reform  Bill  of 
1832,  549  ff- 

Scholasticism,  Wycliffe  and,  222;  Eras- 
mus on,  232  ff. 

Scotland,  representation  in,  542;  Refor- 
mation in,  308  ff. 

Seebohm,  on  Erasmus  and  More,  231 
ff. 

Seeley,  on  Europe  in  the  Elizabethan  age, 
307  ff. 

Serls,  in  Anglo-Saxon  times,  2,  3;  in 
Anglo-Norman  period,  81  ff. ;  relation 
to  lord,  83  ff. ;  relation  to  third  per- 
sons, 86 ;  relation  to  the  state,  87  ff. ; 
how  created,  88  ff. ;  manumission  of, 
91  ff. ;  and  Magna  Carta,  116. 

Sloane,  on  the  Continental  System,  520  ff. 

Socialism,  in  England,  definition  of,  609; 
origin  of,  617 ;  tendencies  of  trades 
unions,  legislation,  and  political  pro- 
grammes towards,  618  ff.;  and  local 
government,  622;  and  imperialism, 

634  ff- 

State  interference,  growth  of,  615. 
Statute,  development   of,  from   petition, 

147  ff. 
Stubbs,  on    the  Anglo-Saxon  conquest, 

6  ff. ;   on  reforms  of  Henry  II,o6  ff. ; 


on  Parliament,  124  ff.,  140  ff. ;  on  the 
Church  in  the  Middle  Ages,  204  ft. 
Supremacy,  royal,  see  Reformation. 

Taxation,  connection  with  representa- 
tion, 137;  and  redress  of  grievances, 
145-147;  alterations  in,  396;  unparlia- 
mentary, 345. 

Theodore,  organization  of  Church  in 
England,  21  ff. 

Theology,  see  Scholasticism. 

Towns,  origin  of,  169;  position  of,  129; 
privileges  of,  130;  charters  of,  130; 
gilds  in,  169  ff. ;  life  in,  during  Mid- 
dle Ages,  185  ff. ;  municipal  defence, 
185 ;  police,  188 ;  preservation  of  boun- 
daries, 188  ;  land  and  property  of,  190; 
improvements  in,  192;  charity  in  aid 
of,  193;  amusements  in,  194;  church 
as  centre  of,  198;  public  spirit  in,  201 
ff. ;  and  Parliament,  543  ff. 

Trent,  Council  of,  313  ft 

Trevelyan,  on  Wycliffe,  221  ff. ;  on 
James  I,  331  ff. 

United  States,  presidential  system  in, 
598  ff. ;  Constitution  of,  compared  with 
that  of  Australia,  650  ff. ;  imperialism 
in,  626. 

Utopia,  written  by  More,  237;  inter- 
national policy  in,  238;  criticism  of 
government,  240;  social  economy  of, 
242;  religion  in,  242. 

Villages,  early  English,  3 ;  see  Manor. 

Walpole,  Sir  Robert,  compared  with 
eighteenth-century  statesmen,  467 ;  not 
an  intriguer,  468 ;  accused  of  Parlia- 
mentary corruption,  469;  charges  of 
pccu'ation,  471 ;  and  civil  service,  473; 
the  evidence  against  him,  474;  his  pri- 
vate affairs,  475. 

Walpole,  Sir  Spencer,  on  the  old  Par- 
liamentary system.  538  ff. ;  on  Reform 
of  1832,  549  ff. 

Wardship,  76. 

Wesley,  Charles,  at  Oxford.  480, 

Wesley.  John,  early  years  of,  479 ;  life  at 
Oxford.  480 ;  conversion  of,  482 ;  and 
supernaturalism,  487;  as  a  man,  489  ff. 


Index 


669 


Wessex,  supremacy  of,  25  ff. 

Whitby,  Synod  of,  19-21. 

Whitefield,  at  Oxford,  480,  481. 

William  the  Conqueror,  advance  on 
London,  62  ft'. ;  negotiations  with  Lon- 
don, 63;  accepts  crown,  66;  corona- 
tion, 67  ff. ;  position  as  sovereign,  73; 
and  feudalism,  75  ff. 

William  III,  lands  in  England, 417 ;  pro- 
claimed king,  421. 

Witenagem6t,  right  of  freemen  to  attend, 
49 ;  absence  of  law  defining  powers  of, 
51 ;  power  in  electing  and  deposing 


kings,  52  ff. ;  share  in  government,  55 
ff. ;  dependence  on  character  of  king, 
58 ;  relation  to  Parliament,  125. 
I  Wolfe,  General,  career  and  character  of, 
454  ff. ;  his  victory  on  the  Heights  of 
Abraham,  462  ff. 

Wolsey,  and  the  Church,  251. 

Wycliffe,  life  of,  221  ff. ;  and  scholasti- 
cism, 222;  development  of  his  doc- 
trines, 223;  and  transubstantiation, 
225 ;  attitude  toward  other  sacraments, 
226  ff. ;  and  the  pope,  229;  and  the 
Bible,  230 ;  and  the  Reformation,  274. 


UNi  !Y  of  CALIFORNIA 

AT 

LOS  ANGELES 
LIBRARY 


UCLA-College  Library 

DA  32  B38J 


College 
Library 


